Aglet

Verify a cross-channel feedback group before closing it

Verification must confirm both equivalence and traceability. Exercise representative source paths, reconcile duplicate counts, and ensure the final state does not hide a channel-specific constraint or treat one channel's silence as resolution. Verification should show that each materially different source path supports the same grouping decision.

Check whether the outcome improved

  1. Reconcile grouped references

    Compare the final membership with each channel's bounded search and confirm account, project, and outcome boundaries. Recheck report and customer counts, and document entries excluded because their context or privacy state prevents comparison.

  2. Exercise source-specific paths

    Run one representative workflow or evidence check per materially different channel context. Confirm the observed outcome and any channel-specific fallback. Record successful boundaries as evidence, not proof about untested channel variants.

  3. Audit the closure record

    Review status, ownership, linked evidence, and revisit triggers. Ensure the closure says which channels were verified and whether unresolved reports remain. If a source cannot be checked, keep its branch visible and provisional.

What to carry forward

Verification passes when grouped evidence reconciles, source differences have meaningful checks, and closure language matches tested scope. If one channel remains unverified, close only the supported group and assign that channel a separate follow-up instead of claiming complete coverage. Keep source-specific uncertainty attached to the group when evidence remains uneven.

Keep the decision with the work.

Use a Work Item in Aglet to record the problem, the evidence you have, and the next decision. Add an owner and priority, then keep updates in the discussion so the next person can follow the reasoning.

Create an account See the product workflow