Function coverage
AI GBS & Global Business Services
The platform observes 90.0% of the 64,200 items a week in scope here, reconstructs 7.0%, and estimates that 1,926 happen where it cannot read them. This statement was produced by source system count and carries a band of plus or minus 6%.
The method behind this statement
Source system count · owned by Head of Global Business Services · Function head
Observed is the transaction count across the twelve towers. Unseen is the residual against the declared weekly volume.
Observed comes straight from what the connected systems return. The remainder is split between what the platform can reconstruct and what it is told exists.
Requester follow-ups taken by a service desk agent over chat and closed verbally.
Who has signed for it
Nobody. This figure rests on its method alone.
An attestation would not turn an estimate into a measurement. It would put a person behind the estimate, which is the difference between a number and a claim. This statement does not have one.
Work filed here that the platform could not see
1 item has been filed by somebody who did the work off-platform.
Gaps raised against this function
1 gap in a chain that something must have filled.
Service desk agents are resolving on the call and closing without a note.
What this statement is, and what it is not
Coverage can only ever be estimated from the outside. Observed is a count the platform can produce from records it holds. Inferred is a count it reconstructs by rule or by cohort. Unseen is an estimate of work the platform knows exists and cannot read, and every statement carries the method that produced it and a stated uncertainty. Nothing here is rounded up.
A coverage statement is disputable by design. The way to disagree with one is to inspect the method and the basis for the unseen figure, both of which are on the statement, rather than to argue about the number.