Quality scorecard versions
The Scorecard versions report compares audits generated with different versions of a quality scorecard. Use it when a campaign changed criteria, scoring mode, or scorecard settings and you need to understand whether new results are comparable with previous ones.
This does not replace operator or campaign reports. It answers a narrower question: what happened to results when the scorecard version changed.
When to use this report
Use it to:
- compare the active version against previous versions;
- check whether a score change matches a scorecard change;
- separate historical audits without a known version;
- identify criteria that fail more often in one version than another;
- confirm whether there is enough volume before drawing conclusions.
For monthly performance without a version focus, use Reports by operator and campaign. For a manually selected sample, use Marked tasks report.
Open the report
From the sidebar, open Reports > Scorecard versions.
If you do not see this option, it may depend on:
- permission to view scorecard version reports;
- campaign access;
- deployment configuration;
- whether the campaign has registered versions yet.
Generate the comparison
- Choose the Channel: Calls or RRSS.
- Select the Campaign.
- Optionally set From and To dates.
- Wait for AuditorIA to load the report.
The channel matters because calls and RRSS can use different scorecards, criteria, and audit records.
If the report is slow or shows a partial-results warning, narrow the date range. Version comparisons are easier to read when the period has enough volume but does not pull too much history.
Select visible versions
When the report loads, version badges appear. You can turn versions on or off to compare only the ones you need.
| Status | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Active | Current scorecard version for that campaign/channel. |
| Historical version | Used by previous audits but no longer active. |
| No version / legacy | Audits saved before version tracking was available. |
| Low sample | Fewer audits than the suggested minimum for confident comparison. |
Do not treat No version / legacy as a formal scorecard version. It is a group of historical audits without a traceable version.
Read the comparison table
The table summarizes each version with:
- audit count;
- average score;
- failure rate;
- most failed criterion;
- active or legacy status.
A best version may be visually highlighted, but do not use it as an automatic conclusion. Check volume, period, channel, and criteria changes first.
If every version has a low sample, the comparison is unreliable. Use the report as orientation, not as final quality evidence.
Review a version in detail
Each version with audits can open its own panel. It can show:
- result summary;
- top failed critical and non-critical criteria;
- failure distribution;
- score distribution;
- performance trends;
- audits over time.
Use these panels to understand why one version looks better or worse.
Interpret differences carefully
Before comparing, confirm:
- versions have comparable volume;
- the selected period covers comparable stages;
- the channel is correct;
- critical criteria changed or stayed the same;
- legacy audits are not being read as a formal version;
- the campaign did not have operational changes unrelated to the scorecard.
A score difference does not always mean real improvement or deterioration. It can also mean the scorecard started measuring something else, a criterion stopped being counted, or a version has too few cases.
Common cases
| Situation | How to read it |
|---|---|
| The new version has a lower score | Check whether it added stricter or critical criteria. |
| The old version looks better | Verify volume and period; it may have a more favorable sample. |
| Legacy appears | Some audits do not have a traceable version. |
| No versions appear | The campaign may not have versioned scorecards or audits in the range. |
| Partial results appear | Narrow dates so charts and details calculate over fewer audits. |