Automatic Prioritization of Incoming Requests
Instantly identify priority requests and route them to the right processing workflows.
The word “urgent” on almost every ticket
A support team receives requests of very different real weight: a customer who writes “urgent” on every email, a technician who reports a network fault in a flat, matter-of-fact tone even though it affects a sensitive site. Handled in order of arrival, these requests hide their actual criticality behind the writing style of whoever sent them, and the loudest sender is not always the one with the most at stake.
The priority stated by the sender is not a reliable guide
The word chosen by the person writing the message says little about actual impact: it depends on their temperament, their habit of raising alarms, their familiarity with how requests get handled. A model trained to spot urgent-sounding phrasing reproduces that bias rather than correcting it, and then displays it back as the priority.
A shared definition of urgency, settled in advance
Establishing a genuine priority requires a written definition of what counts as critical: contractual thresholds, the criticality of the asset involved, incident history, rather than the tone of the message. It also requires someone named to arbitrate the cases the definition does not cover. Without that groundwork, the system has nothing objective to measure against.
Automating a ranking nobody has defined yet
We build systems that cross-reference the request with the context data already available: the customer’s contract tier, the criticality of the asset involved, prior incidents at the same site. The resulting ranking drives the processing queue, while a person keeps the ability to escalate a case for reasons the data cannot capture, such as the relationship with a strategic account. Where that definition of priority does not yet exist on paper, it is worth building before the system.