Using Ticket Data to Justify Resources
"We're swamped" has been said in every budget meeting since budget meetings began. It has never once produced a hire, because it is a feeling and the person across the table is holding a spreadsheet. "The desk received 412 tickets last month. Each takes a median of forty minutes of technician time. That is 275 hours of work, and two technicians have 260 hours between them after leave and meetings. The backlog has grown by nineteen tickets a month for five months, and first-response time has doubled since the spring." That is not a feeling. It is arithmetic, and arithmetic is a language finance speaks. The ticket system has been keeping the evidence the whole time.
This series is about turning it into a case. It covers evidence over anecdote and the five numbers that make up the evidence set. It covers the headcount case, built from capacity arithmetic in hours. It covers the tooling case, built from rework and a trial rather than a brochure. Then comes the training and time case, for the week that would pay for itself. It covers anticipating the pushback, with the calm answer to each of the four usual objections. And it covers what to do after the decision, whichever way it went, so the next ask is easier. All numbers are worked examples in hours; no salaries, no prices. A case made from the desk's own tickets is hard to argue with, because the people arguing are in them.
Articles in This Series
- Evidence Over Anecdote: Why 'We Are Swamped' Never Wins
Why 'we are swamped' fails and a capacity sum does not; the evidence set; a worked example in hours; and the evidence list. - The Headcount Case: Capacity Arithmetic in Hours
Capacity arithmetic, backlog growth, response time decay, what one more person changes, the ask in one page, and the headcount case one-pager. - The Tooling Case: Rework Hours, the Gap and the Trial
The cost of the current tool in hours of rework, the specific gap in tickets, the trial result, and the tooling case one-pager. - The Training and Time Case: A Week That Pays Itself Back
The fix that needs a protected week, the skill gap visible in the tickets, the knowledge base that needs a day, and the time-investment case. - Anticipating the Pushback: Four Objections and the Data
'Can't you automate it', 'other teams manage', 'we will revisit next year', 'just prioritise better'; the answer to each from the data; and the pushback table. - After the Decision: Showing the Result Either Way
The before and after, closing the loop with whoever decided, and the credibility for the next ask. Covers the ask that was refused and what to measure anyway, and the follow-up report.
Explore More Topics
This series is part of the QuerySolv helpdesk topic library. It covers the foundations, processes, communication, knowledge, tooling, metrics, classic ticket domains, people and strategy behind a support desk that works. The library pairs well with the software we build: QuerySolv. It is a self-hosted help desk that runs as one Windows service on your own network. It is licensed once per installation, not per agent per month.