Loading
Comfortable on a daily average — check the peak-hour line, which is where SLAs are actually missed.
Daily averages hide the problem. A team comfortable across the day can still miss every SLA in the two hours when a quarter of the volume arrives — which is why the peak line matters more than the headline. This models arrival and handling only; it says nothing about how quickly a given ticket can be resolved.
Checks agent capacity against ticket volume, including the peak hour where SLAs are actually missed.
Every figure it produces is arithmetic on what you enter, and the working is shown line by line rather than summarised into a single number.
Replace the defaults with your own figures. They are examples chosen to make the shape obvious, not benchmarks — using them unchanged tells you about a company that is not yours.
The lines beneath the headline are the useful part: they show which input is driving the result, which is what makes the answer arguable in a good way.
Daily averages hide the problem. A team comfortable across the day can still miss every SLA in the two hours when a quarter of the volume arrives — which is why the peak line matters more than the headline. This models arrival and handling only; it says nothing about how quickly a given ticket can be resolved.
Where two readings of the same question exist, both are shown rather than one being chosen for you. That is deliberate — the difference between them is usually the thing worth discussing.
If a figure looks wrong, change the input you least believe and watch what moves. That is faster than checking the arithmetic.
No. The tool runs in the page, nothing is sent anywhere, and there is no follow-up.
No. They are examples chosen to make the shape clear. Use your own figures.
It is stated in the working shown beneath the result, so you can check it rather than trust it.
Half an hour on your own figures, and an honest answer about the parts Treepie does not improve.