6 Replies Latest reply on Jul 31, 2014 12:56 PM by Valerie Armstrong

    Smart List Filters - Leave out any records with "Success"

    Justin Showers
      We're building a smart list and want a 2nd set of eyes (and 3rd, 4th, 5th...) on a section of our filters.

      We want to fillter out of this Smart List any lead record that has reached a Success Member Stage in ANY of our past Programs (archived or otherwise).

      Here's what we're thinking:

      [ Member of Program = FALSE , Program = IS ANY ]
      OR
      [ Member of Program = TRUE, Program = IS ANY, Success = FALSE ]

      Does this make sense? Suggestions?
        • Re: Smart List Filters - Leave out any records with "Success"
          Valerie Armstrong
          Hi Justin,

          This looks to be correct.  The first filter will show you all leads that are not members of any program and the second fitler will show you leads that are members of one or more programs but are not marked as a success in any programs. 

          You can spot-check a few leads in your list if you wish.  Open the lead's activity history and search for program status in the quick find.  When you click on the activity ID, you should see that Success = False. 
          • Re: Smart List Filters - Leave out any records with "Success"
            Justin Showers
            To test this we setup another Smart List that should be the opposite... filtering in only the records that have reached a success stage:

            [ Member of Program = TRUE, Program = IS ANY, Success = TRUE ]

            Since these lists should be mutually exclusive, we then setup another Smart List that pulls in:

            [ Member of Smart List, Lead in = List 1 ]
            AND
            [ Member of Smart List, Lead in = List 2 ]

            This should technically pull 0 records if everything worked. Unfortunately, it's pulling a few thousand :(

            • Re: Smart List Filters - Leave out any records with "Success"
              Valerie Armstrong
              Hmm, looks like I was wrong about this.  From what you are describing, it seems that the  [ Member of Program = TRUE, Program = IS ANY, Success = FALSE ] logic from List 1 is finding leads that are a member of any program, of which they were not a success in at least one program they are a member in.  

              Try using the Not Program Status Was Changed filter.  Set the Program = Any and Succes = False and see if that you still find records showing up in List 1 and 2.

              Going through a few of the leads that are looking for leads in both List 1 and List 2 may give you an idea of what filters you may be missing as well.
              • Re: Smart List Filters - Leave out any records with "Success"
                Dory Viscogliosi
                Justin, have you looked at any of the offending records? It it possible that once programs are archived they won't be counted in these smart lists. That would be the first problem that I would want to check. Otherwise, I'd really try to drill down into a couple records and figure out why they're matching up in both of your lists. That will help you to figure out where the problem is.
                • Re: Smart List Filters - Leave out any records with "Success"
                  Justin Showers
                  Yes Val, we're thinking the problem is with the 1st list's filter..

                  Member of Program = TRUE, Program = IS ANY, Success = FALSE ]

                  Which seems to be saying: If you're a member of any Program in which you're not a Success, come on in! Of course, they could be a Success in another...

                  We now think the solution will be to keep the 2nd list we used as a test that pulls in someone who IS a success in ANY campaign, and then in our master list use the filter...

                  [ Member of Smart List = Lead not in = List 2 ]

                  Seems much more simple anyway.
                  • Re: Smart List Filters - Leave out any records with "Success"
                    Valerie Armstrong
                    I'm glad you were able to find a workaround for this, Justin.  Seems that you also might have a suggestion for an easier way to accomplish this to add to the ideas section... :)