| You're probably getting downvotes because you said "ticket." Which speaks to another problem with most large company cultures: ticket shoveling. In a healthy company, every ticket should receive one of three outcomes. (1) I can fix this, I work the ticket to completion, then request verification it's resolved. (2) I cannot fix this, but I know someone who can. I add context if needed, forward it to the appropriate person, and stay appraised of it and available until it's completed. (3) I cannot fix this, and nobody I know of can. I list out reasons why this cannot be fixed, and give any information I might have about alternative contacts who might(!) be able to help, and close the ticket. In most companies, and I think this has been exacerbated by outsourced IT and contractual resolution SLAs, until everyone's internalized it as the way they and everyone else should act, you get something like this. (1) Is work. This is to be avoided at all cost. (2) I blindly forward a ticket on to anyone else who looks remotely responsible, to get it out of my queue, and then wash my hands of the entire matter and forget it ever existed. I certainly don't follow up or add context. (3) I close the ticket without providing any reason why, or information I have about someone who might know something I don't, who could help. A reliable metric I've come up with for measuring corporate and/or team disfunction is to count how many circuits a worst-case ticket can receive (where a circuit is: originator -> some number of teams -> originator/loop). My record is 3, before someone noticed. |