HCD.6:5.2 - Ticket Load after Duplicate Removal

Four people each have six active-processing hours per day. Incoming records rise from 50 to 80 and each distinct request takes 18 minutes. The initial worked case shows that 50 and 80 distinct requests require 15 and 24 person-hours; the observed queue alone does not establish lower individual productivity.

In a stipulated variation, the 80 records include 20 duplicate messages attached to existing requests, leaving 60 distinct requests. The target action is to recognize that the unit of account changed before calculating 18 person-hours of active processing.

Now leave the duplicate count unknown and ask whether the day’s requests fit the stated active-processing capacity. There can be no more than 80 distinct requests: at 18 minutes each, they require at most 24 person-hours, equal to the four people’s supplied capacity. Return that sufficient upper bound and keep the exact count unknown. The answer concerns active effort under the stipulated processing assumptions; it establishes no queue-clearance, response-time or safety guarantee. Obtaining the count is unnecessary for this answer.

Change the receiving use to an allocation that needs the exact active-processing load of these requests. The upper bound no longer supplies that quantity. Stipulate an authorized existing request view and five minutes of available coordinator time to open it, resolve the duplicate labels and check the total. Correcting the allocation warrants that obtainable burden. Obtain the count for this use; until it is available, retain the upper bound with the exact allocation unresolved. If the view supplies 60 distinct requests, the processing load is 18 person-hours. The five minutes of coordination are an additional cost, not request-processing time or free work.

These cases distinguish a changed unit, a sufficient bound and a receiving use that needs another quantity. Merely replacing the support team with a warehouse would not test those distinctions.