A review protocol for checking whether positive replies, objections, referrals, and opt-outs reach the right owner with a usable response clock.
Research question and scope
This protocol examines reply intent routing. It reports what a defined record can show in one window and does not claim an industry rate or a causal effect.
Population and unit of analysis
The unit is one inbound reply at classification. Keeping one unit prevents linked events from being counted as independent successes or failures.
Definitions and measures
The main measure is the share misrouted and the time lost before correction. Report the denominator and time window beside every count so the result is not read as a bare percentage.
Evidence and data dictionary
Collect the intent code, owner, and first response. Label missing, unavailable, and confirmed negative as separate states rather than collapsing them into a blank.
Sampling and collection
The sample is replies received during one week. Record the observation date and exclude items that were already open before the window begins.
Analysis and reporting
Present misroutes by intent and by channel. Separate seller behavior from tool behavior whenever the evidence allows that distinction.
Limitations and sources of error
Limits include threads with mixed intent and forwarded replies. State them beside the finding and avoid turning a small operational sample into a universal standard.
Review cadence and next action
The practical next step is to revise one intent rule after a misroute sample. Re-test a later sample after the change so the review produces a decision, not just a report.