We've gotten into a tangled mess in regards to Associated Contacts as they misfire our NPS survey after Ticket completion.
From what I can tell this has come down to not having a concise understanding of how Associated Contacts are used, and where their effects lie.
We use Associated Contacts primarily for our refferral program, labelling who the Refferred Customer is and who the Refferrer is - we currently only do this on the Deal level and do not use Associated Contacts on the Contact level itself.
What we currently do
- Contacts enter CRM
- Automation creates an immediate Deal and Associates that contact to it, and to the eventual Ticket as well if the Deal is Won
- If our custom feild "Is this a Refferral" = Yes than Sales will find out who the Refferrer is and then Associate them to the same Deal. They are then labelled "Refferrer" whilst the "Refferred Customer" just remains blank.
- Sales maintain this set up for the entirety of the Deal process until it is won
- Automation then creates a Ticket, after the Deal is won, and is left with productions
- When Ticket is created it migrates all information from the Deal as well as all the Contacts associated to it
- Once the Ticket enters "Installation Complete" stage of the pipeline it will fire an NPS survey intended for the customer only, which they do recieve. Our issue is: it is also sending the NPS curvey to the refferrer of the customer
It may not be so much a tangled mess as our the process is relatively straight forward but it is a mess none the less that I'm needing to resolve for the company so post service work can be done/automated correctly without issue.
I'm of the belief that its due to both the Contacts being associated to the Deal and the subsequent Ticket when instead the customer should be the only one associated to Deal/Ticket. The relationship between the Refferrer and Refferred Customer can/has to be isolated to only the Contact level to avoid conflicting with post service work of Deals/Tickets.
Side note:It's also had a funny impact on reporting of closed deals (the count is duplicated per contactof a single Deal) which is resolved when removing the associated contact from the deal, semi supporting my belief
Am I correct in this thought process, and if so what is there to help support it? I ask as the current process is already set in the minds of Sales, and mangments overseeing of their process' - mainly due to the rocky adoption we first had when moving to HubSpot.
The need to change it, again, may cause a varying degree of disruption and counter arguments so I want to make it as friendly as possible for the team to adopt whilst being concise. Especially if it is to be a permanent change - which I inevitably see it being
I think your thought process is sound - I can see why they wanna associate the referer to deal and ticket level as well in case they wanna run some kind of X-object reporting in the context of the referer.
Ideally, I would have referer as a custom object and associate it instead while the contact object is purely for prospects and customers.
But looks like you only have Pro Hub so the association game is only on contact ➝ contact level sounds fair at this point.
I think your thought process is sound - I can see why they wanna associate the referer to deal and ticket level as well in case they wanna run some kind of X-object reporting in the context of the referer.
Ideally, I would have referer as a custom object and associate it instead while the contact object is purely for prospects and customers.
But looks like you only have Pro Hub so the association game is only on contact ➝ contact level sounds fair at this point.
