OW-06
Assignee Ping-Pong Within Short Window
Ownership
Default severity: medium
ProcessOutputQualityRisk
What it detects
assignee alternates between same two actors ≥N times in window; tests; catalogue.
Detection formula
No published identification formula is available yet for this rule.Examples in practice
- A team shows assignee alternates between same two actors ≥n times in window; tests; catalogue during analysis.
- Example signal: assignee alternates between same two actors ≥N times in window; tests; catalogue.
Suggested response
Clarify ownership at handoffs and ensure active and done items have an accountable assignee.
Coaching playbook
Symptom
The "Assignee Ping-Pong Within Short Window" signal shows a repeatable delivery anti-pattern on the cited issues.
Why it matters
When "Assignee Ping-Pong Within Short Window" keeps appearing, the team is signalling a repeatable process gap. Left unexamined, the pattern hides where work really stalls and makes improvement metrics harder to trust.
What you can achieve
Clarify ownership at handoffs and ensure active and done items have an accountable assignee.
Facilitation questions
- What system change would stop "Assignee Ping-Pong Within Short Window" from firing again?
- What do the cited issues have in common — same root cause or same workaround?
- Who owns the two-week experiment and how will we verify on the next import?
Run this rule against your own tracker data with Flow Analyzer.