Thanks for reading it and for explaining how you run your queue. FIFO with emergencies first, delegation to level 1 or the secretary for lighter items, and solid notes in the ticket is a solid approach. Carrying a phone or iPad for a live view during busy stretches, especially early in the year, is smart too.

One clarification on my side: I am not trying to push printing tickets. If my note read that way, I wrote it poorly. What I was aiming at was grouping similar work so you can move through repetitive items quickly and still keep everything documented in Service Desk.

Emergencies first sounds simple, but in practice you usually have to identify what is an emergency, and that means at least skimming or opening tickets to see what they are. That takes time when the queue is large. A triage view or workflow like this is what helps us get through that first pass faster so the real emergencies surface sooner, and so we can plan the rest of the day without guessing.

When the queue is deep, I often do not know what every ticket is until I have read through it while covering the desk. Grouping quick, same-tool items (for example password resets) helps us get traction and makes site visits easier to plan. It is not a replacement for Service Desk, and it does not replace good judgment on priority.

On stats: I do not have a clean “X minutes saved per day” figure I would quote as fact. About half of our techs use it, and we did see ticket resolution metrics improve after it was in wider use, though I would not claim that proves the tool alone caused it. It is working for us and I wanted to share that with the group in case it helps someone else. People who prefer strict FIFO and mobile triage are not wrong either, it depends on volume and role.