Differentiate between verification ability vs. responsibility (more granular verification settings and/or verification notification settings)


What is the problem?

For many of our cards, we’d like to give a large group the ability to verify content, while still having a smaller team within that group responsible for making sure the cards stay verified. This is to more closely align with the KCS concept of “collective ownership.” To be a little more specific about our case:

  • Ideally, any support agent could (and should) verify a card whenever they use it in the course of their support work (as long as they know nothing is incorrect, of course), starting the verification interval over again and potentially even keeping frequently used cards perpetually verified.
  • For any cards that do expire or where someone specifically requests verification because something is out of date, etc., a smaller group (Docs) within the Support team would then actually be responsible for reviewing the content and verifying the card. (There shouldn’t be a bystander problem here, because the Docs team knows that they are ultimately the ones responsible and has KPIs and OKRs to meet.)

Currently, this isn’t reasonably feasible because some of the people on the Support team are also in other smaller verifier groups where they are the officially responsible verifiers for some cards (such as Escalated Support and Billing). If they’re notified about all the verification needs for all support-related cards, they won’t have an easy way to know when their cards actually need review and verification. And even anyone who’s not on one of those more specialized teams could get overwhelmed with verification notifications and maybe feel like they are responsible for all those cards. For both groups, turning off notifications entirely also has its downsides.

Who is it a problem for?

  • The larger team in this scenario, because they don’t have as much ownership over our internal KB content and always need to request verification, even if they’re seasoned support agents making edits they know are correct. Cards are also more likely to expire and appear untrusted (until the Docs team is able to get them) even if the content is just fine.
  • The smaller “responsible” team in this scenario, since their verification workload is much higher without the shared ownership and participation from the rest of the team.

How do you solve the problem today?

The relatively small Docs team is responsible for keeping most support-related cards verified. We can’t always prioritize this work over more urgent tasks, so often cards remain unverified for longer than necessary.

How would you ideally solve the problem?

I see two potential solutions:

  • Make verification settings more granular. That is, have some way to make that “ability” vs. “responsibility” distinction on a card-by-card basis. This would then flow through to whether people receive notifications for verifying a particular card, whether they’d see it in their Tasks section, etc.
  • Make verification notification settings more granular. This could look like allowing people to say, for example, “I want verification notifications for cards where the Escalated Support group is the verifier but not where the General Support group is the verifier.

 

Be the first to reply!