# Inspect starvation in a queue rotation

Illustrative planning brief; no automatic product import.

Synthetic planning case: A declared rotation should give one review slot to class B in each two-slot cycle. The actual log of eight slots is A,A,A,A,A,A,A,A.

## Decision

Class B received zero of its four declared cycle opportunities. Inspect the repeated exception and restore an agreed service rule rather than calling eight completed A reviews proof that the rotation worked.

## Owned work

- Check the governing rotation
  - Owner role: Queue owner
  - Acceptance evidence: One B slot per two-slot cycle is a real accepted policy for this example.
- Inspect exceptions by cycle
  - Owner role: Coordinator
  - Acceptance evidence: All four omitted B opportunities remain visible with their actual cause unresolved.
- Choose the service correction
  - Owner role: Decision owner
  - Acceptance evidence: The rotation or its authorized exceptions are explicitly changed and the next cycles are checked.

## Workflow

1. Check the governing rotation. Check: One B slot per two-slot cycle is a real accepted policy for this example.
2. Inspect exceptions by cycle. Check: All four omitted B opportunities remain visible with their actual cause unresolved.
3. Choose the service correction. Check: The rotation or its authorized exceptions are explicitly changed and the next cycles are checked.

## Judgment

The log does not record eligibility or exception reasons. Retain that gap rather than attributing motives or guaranteeing fairness.


## Filled manual planning note

Class B received zero of its four declared cycle opportunities. Inspect the repeated exception and restore an agreed service rule rather than calling eight completed A reviews proof that the rotation worked. Four cycles×one declared B slot=4 opportunities; actual B service=0. Total service of eight says nothing about compliance with the work-class rotation. The log does not record eligibility or exception reasons. Retain that gap rather than attributing motives or guaranteeing fairness.


## Working artifact

- B omitted in every cycle / Zero service across four opportunities / Check B eligibility and exception authority
- A uses all eight slots / Total throughput hides class allocation / Review class outcomes beside the total
- Next rotation under review / Cause and governing rule must be resolved / Inspect each of the next two cycles


## Workflow questions

### Does zero B service prove deliberate neglect?

No. Missing eligible B work or another accepted exception may explain it; inspect the actual conditions.

### Can eight completed items prove fairness?

No. Fairness and required class coverage are different from total throughput.

## Product connection

Use the owned checks and downloaded brief to discuss this planning decision alongside your TeamBoostAI tasks. Confirm available fields, roles and account features separately. The example is manual; it does not calculate live analytics, create work or run an experiment in the product.

Confirm account availability before adopting this manual outline.

## Original worked case

Synthetic records, manual planning only. No account import or live analytics.

### Inspect the invented case records

Two-slot cycle | Actual service | Declared B opportunity | Observed B service
--- | --- | --- | ---
1 | A,A | 1 | 0
2 | A,A | 1 | 0
3 | A,A | 1 | 0
4 | A,A | 1 | 0

### Reasoning

Four cycles×one declared B slot=4 opportunities; actual B service=0. Total service of eight says nothing about compliance with the work-class rotation.

### Bounded result

Class B received zero of its four declared cycle opportunities. Inspect the repeated exception and restore an agreed service rule rather than calling eight completed A reviews proof that the rotation worked.

### Distinct decision

The artifact tests compliance with a declared recurring class-allocation rule, not simply age-based queue priority.

### Limits

The log does not record eligibility or exception reasons. Retain that gap rather than attributing motives or guaranteeing fairness.

### Definitions and method context

- The Kanban Guide — https://kanbanguides.org/the-kanban-guide/ — Workflow and flow-measure context. Queue policies and staffing scenarios are explicitly local examples, not delivery guarantees.