Once had a user manually change their ticket to Priority 1, which we used to indicate dozens of people/everyone down, because their M key only worked half the time they pressed it.
Once had a user manually change their ticket to Priority 1, which we used to indicate dozens of people/everyone down, because their M key only worked half the time they pressed it.
I think your ticket system should have had two labels. One for priority (how does this impact your work) and one for scope (how many people does this impact) to arrive at an urgency.
But anyway, that wouldn’t stop some users from saying it’s a continent wide M key outage stopping all work.
Every ticketing system that I’ve used actually does have this! The service desk finagles it to get the desired “priority” that will make the end-user happy. We have the option to correct it once it gets to us.
I think that’s because many ticket systems implement the ITIL priority matrix??, or something. I’ve been away from helpdesk for a number of years now and only kind of rember a matrix I probably only kind of correctly described.
Our system let users pick only some of the matrix values, they couldn’t declare a high priority, high impact, high urgency, ticket on their own. Like you, we handled setting the “true” value once the ticket was moved past level 1/evaluated by someone in IT.
Yup, we use a decently popular ticketing system that follows this, even has a mini training course to allow you to understand it all iirc
I think you are exactly correct on that! It is something that seems like it would be useful, but nowhere I’ve ever worked used it correctly.
I once got an emergency after-hours ticket to fix a computer that was shutting off randomly. I went to check it out, and the power plug was loose. I asked the user about it, and she said she knew it was loose, but she couldn’t plug it in because her skirt was too short. No, this isn’t an intro to a porno.
Wut 🤦♀️
I’ve seen priority and severity work well ish on client facing/controlled tickets.