Next-Best-Action Designer
This domain tests whether you can configure next-best-action end to end in the NBA Designer rather than hand-building every strategy, and whether you know which tab owns which rule.
What lives where
- Actions – defined with issue/group, attributes, availability and value; actions are the candidates.
- Engagement policy – where the context (channel, direction, customer context) is set, plus applicability, suitability and contact policy.
- Arbitration – business levers and their weights decide how propensity, value and context influence ranking.
- Treatments – channel-specific content attached to actions; an action with no treatment cannot be presented in that channel.
Rules of thumb
- Applicability answers "may this action be offered"; suitability answers "should it be offered"; contact policy answers "has the customer had enough".
- Engagement policies are context-specific: the same action can be applicable in one channel and not another.
- Business levers are set per issue/group, so weighting one group does not automatically change another.
Worked example
A bank wants a card-upgrade offer on the inbound web channel. In Engagement policy, set channel = Web and direction = Inbound. Applicability: customer has held the card at least six months and has no active upgrade. Suitability: minimum propensity threshold so weak candidates are dropped. Contact policy: at most one card offer per 30 days. In Arbitration, set a heavier value weight because upgrades have high margin, then create a web banner treatment. Reasoning: the action only becomes an NBA if it clears applicability, suitability and contact policy before arbitration ranks it.
Traps that cost marks
- Swapping applicability and suitability in scenario questions.
- Building a treatment but never linking it to an action, then wondering why nothing shows.
- Assuming changes in the NBA Designer bypass arbitration weights set elsewhere.
- Ignoring direction: inbound and outbound decisions use different engagement contexts.