A service desk uses triage to ensure they work on the most urgent tasks first. This sometimes causes user satisfaction issues, because low priority requests can wart a long time before anyone starts…

Question

Options

• ATrain users so that they know their requests might be delayed if there are many higher priority
• BIncrease the priority of requests that have been waiting a long time and are at risk of breaching
• CRecruit more service desk staff so that they are able to work on low priority requests even when
• DUse first-in first-out prioritization instead of triage, to ensure that tasks are worked on in the order

• A
  18% (5)
• B
  71% (20)
• C
  7% (2)
• D
  4% (1)

Explanation

Priority escalation (aging) is the standard ITIL-aligned technique for balancing triage with fairness: when a low-priority request has waited long enough to risk breaching its Service Level Agreement (SLA), its priority is raised so it gets attention before a breach occurs - this directly addresses the satisfaction and SLA problem without abandoning triage.

Why the distractors fail:

• A - Training users to accept delays treats the symptom (complaints) rather than fixing the underlying problem (requests actually waiting too long).
• C - Hiring more staff is expensive, doesn't scale well, and is a disproportionate solution when a simple process change (aging) achieves the same goal.
• D - First-in, first-out eliminates triage entirely, meaning a critical outage could sit behind a password reset - this trades one problem for a worse one.

Memory tip: Think of it as a "patience timer" - a low-priority ticket earns seniority the longer it waits, eventually demanding the same urgency as a higher-priority one. The keyword to associate with this concept is aging (or priority aging), which is how ITIL frameworks formally describe option B.

No community discussion yet for this question.