Operational participation

Routing a user-driven Step to a Persona identifies the participant group responsible for the work. When several users represent that Persona, the Assignment also raises an operating question: who, specifically, should perform this work now?

The answer may depend on an established relationship, shared team responsibility, specialist capability, formal authority, service commitments, or workload conditions. These factors shape how ownership, eligibility, continuity, and work selection should operate in the Case Type.

Applied to Tour Booking, the Step Prepare Equipment may be routed to the Tour Operator Persona because Tour Operators perform operational preparation. But the routed Persona alone does not decide whether any Tour Operator can complete the task, whether the same Tour Operator who confirmed the booking should continue, or whether a qualified operator is required for a specialized excursion. Those details are part of the operating model.

The Solution Designer does not need to configure every routing mechanism in Blueprint. The design responsibility is to identify the business condition that matters and record it clearly enough for Authoring.

After identifying the responsible Persona, decide whether the Assignment should be owned by one identified user or remain available to a team.

Use individual ownership when continuity, relationship context, or personal accountability affects the outcome. In Tour Booking, a customer question may be best handled by the Tour Operator already familiar with the booking. The established context helps the operator respond accurately and avoids forcing the customer to repeat information.

Use shared ownership when any eligible team member can complete the Assignment. Routine equipment preparation can remain available to the Tour Operations team because the responsibility is shared and the outcome does not depend on one identified user.

The distinction matters because individual ownership creates a stronger continuity expectation. Shared ownership gives the operation more flexibility and can reduce delays when the work does not depend on a specific person.

The following figure shows the factors used to determine whether an assignment should be owned by an individual user or shared among a team:

Shared ownership establishes the eligible team. The next decision is whether team membership alone is sufficient or whether some Assignments require an additional qualification.

Shared ownership makes an Assignment available to a team, but not every team member may be qualified to perform every piece of work. Some Assignments require an additional capability, such as certification, language, location, product knowledge, safety authorization, or experience with a specific type of work.

Applied to Tour Booking, every Tour Operator may be able to prepare routine equipment for a standard walking tour. A marine-excursion safety check may require a Tour Operator qualified for boating excursions. That qualification affects the result because an unqualified operator could miss safety, regulatory, or operational requirements.

The Solution Designer should confirm why the qualification matters and which Assignments require it. Avoid restricting routine work when team membership already provides sufficient evidence of eligibility. Adding unnecessary qualification rules can slow work distribution and make the operational model harder to maintain.

Individual ownership and specialist eligibility create an important follow-up question: what should happen when the expected user is unavailable?

The answer depends on what the Assignment must preserve. Sometimes the most important factor is the established relationship with the customer. Sometimes it is the required qualification. Sometimes it is timely completion. The Solution Designer should identify which business priority matters most before deciding whether work should remain with the original user, move to a substitute, return to a shared team, or escalate for intervention.

Applied to Tour Booking, a routine preparation task can remain available to other eligible Tour Operators because the work is shared and does not require one person’s context. A customer follow-up may move to a substitute who can preserve continuity by reviewing the booking history and continuing the conversation. A marine safety check must remain with someone who holds the required qualification. If a weather-related decision threatens the departure time, the existing SLA and escalation design should support timely intervention.

Relationship continuity, qualification continuity, and timely completion represent key considerations for maintaining effective work assignments, as shown in the following figure:

The goal is not to create a complex exception model for every Assignment. The goal is to protect the business outcome where absence could affect service, safety, accountability, or customer experience.

When multiple Assignments and multiple users are available, the Solution Designer should evaluate whether manual selection or automated selection creates a better operational result.

Manual selection can work when users are expected to choose their own work based on context, availability, or team norms. Automated selection adds value when the business needs more consistent prioritization, service performance, workload distribution, or qualification-based selection.

In Pega Infinity™, Get Next Work can automatically select from individual and shared work using implemented criteria such as Assignment Urgency, skills, and availability. The Solution Designer should define the business outcome first: which work should receive attention, which users may perform it, and whether service commitments, qualifications, or workload balance should influence the selection.

Applied to Tour Booking, automated selection may be useful during peak season when many preparation tasks, customer follow-ups, and exception reviews are active at the same time. Work that is approaching an SLA deadline, requires a qualified user, or has customer-impacting consequences may need to rise above routine work.

The final test is whether the operating model explains how each Assignment reaches someone who can perform it without overcomplicating the design.

The following figure shows a checklist for evaluating assignment operating models to ensure that work reaches qualified users without adding unnecessary complexity. Review all user-driven Assignments in the Tour Booking Case Type and ask:

Refine the Blueprint where additional qualification, continuity, reassignment, or selection criteria create meaningful operational value. Remove unnecessary conditions where they do not protect continuity, capability, service, or accountability.

Operational participation turns Personas into practical work-distribution decisions. When several users represent the same Persona, the Solution Designer must determine whether each Assignment should use individual or shared ownership, whether shared work requires additional qualification, how continuity should be protected during absence, and whether automated work selection would improve operational outcomes.

For Tour Booking, these decisions clarify how work reaches the right Tour Operator, when a qualified operator is required, how customer continuity is preserved, and how urgent or specialized work can receive the right attention.

Blueprint records the responsible Persona, routed Step, and service expectation. Focused Notes preserve additional business conditions for Authoring, such as eligibility, qualification, substitution, workload, availability, or work-selection intent.

The design must now establish which parts of a Case Type and its supporting data each participant may use, and where sensitivity, context, or customer rights require stronger protection.

Check your knowledge with the following interaction.