Support Dashboard
Support Dashboard
Executive Summary
Release Intelligence · GitHub Analysis
Key Finding
305 issues — P3 closed, P4 in progress (day 1 of P4). P1: 6.5/day → P2: 9.6/day → P3: 6.3/day. P4 opens with 3 issues on day 1 — all bugs, 3 Critical/High. Bug volume dominates at 90% of all issues.
Q2 to date: 279 bugs, 25 requests, 1 improvement. 69% filed at Critical or High (211 of 305). 288 resolved — 94% resolution rate. Engineering throughput holding strong.
279
Bugs
Q2 to date
305
Total issues
Q2 to date
69%
Critical / High
filing rate
Frontend releases per period overlaid on issue count
Total merged PRs (Backend + Frontend) — proxy for engineering change velocity
First period of Q2 — closed:
~63 bugs filed in P1. 16 Critical, 40 High filed at intake.
Final period — closed:
P2 final: 136 issues · 124 bugs · 37 Critical, 56 High.
Final — closed:
P3 final: 88 issues · 78 bugs · 18 Critical, 47 High · 222 PRs merged.
Early signals (day 1):
P4 so far (1 day): 3 issues · 3 bugs · 2 Critical, 1 High. 13 days remaining.
⚠ Pace Pattern: P2 Was the Peak
P1: 7.4/day → P2: 9.7/day → P3: 6.3/day. P2 now looks like the Q2 peak. P3 moderated despite higher engineering throughput (222 PRs vs 309 in P2). P4 opens today — early read by end of week will confirm if moderation holds.
📈 Sale & Calc Overtook Payroll in P3
For the first time in Q2, Sale & Calc (24) surpassed Payroll (14) as the top area in a period. Across all of Q2, Payroll still leads cumulative volume. These two areas plus Onboarding account for ~45% of all Q2 issues — same three-way concentration as Q1.
🔧 Resolution Rate Strong — Severity Still Broken
288 of 305 issues resolved (94% resolution rate) — engineering throughput is healthy. However, 69% still filed Critical or High (211 of 305). The volume is being handled; the rubric problem remains unaddressed at the filing stage.
Overview
Section 1 — Severity
Stacked by severity across bi-weekly periods
Tracks highest-severity issues per period — key risk indicator
Section 2 — Engineering Throughput
% of tickets with Status = Done within each period
Count of non-Done tickets by status category
Section 3 — Direction of Travel
Actual bug count per bi-weekly period with trendline
Bug % change vs previous period
% of bugs that are Critical or High priority each period
Each functional area shown separately across all 6 periods
Section 4 — Critical Load Concentration
Top 10 clients — which clients carry the most critical load
Top 10 functional areas — which areas attract the highest-severity issues
Section 5 — Product Engineering Focus
Top 9 issue labels + Other as doughnut
Stacked bar — which areas were most affected each period
Section 6 — Customer Impact
Horizontal bar sorted by total issue count (excl. "All")
Stacked bar — which clients drove volume each period
Section 7 — Nature of Problems
Stacked count by issue type across all periods
Count of each type per period — spot shifts in the mix
100% stacked — share of bugs vs all other types each period
All-time breakdown across all filtered issues
Section 8 — Volume Context
Bi-weekly issue volume
Running total — shows overall pace of issue reporting
Section 9 — Operational Detail
Repository split across periods
Breadth of impact — distinct clients raising issues
Issue count by priority (row) and type (col) — darker = higher
Leadership View · Cross-Functional Findings
The Narrative
The first 21 days of Q2 brought 175 bugs out of 197 total issues — pace has accelerated from ~7/day in P1 to ~13/day in P2. The bug pattern is still not an Engineering-quality problem. It’s a time problem — the same small expert pool carrying feature velocity, critical incident response, code review, and new client onboarding simultaneously, with no scaffolding for functional area ownership, cross-training, severity discipline, or regression tests.
This is a cross-functional failure mode. Engineering, CS, Product, and Business each own specific pieces. In isolation none of them can fix it. Together they will.
66%
Bugs filed Critical / High
2%
Filed Low / Very Low
6
Experts without backup
Severity classification at intake. Dedup check before filing. Reproducibility confirmation. Closure verification with the customer. Proactively test payroll runs 1–2 business days before client cutoffs to surface issues in scheduled engineering windows, not in emergency mode.
Author the severity taxonomy with CS. Allocate ≥15% of each sprint to regression / tech-debt. Sign off on functional-area ownership assignments. Block new features in top-3 areas without feature flags.
Cap new-client server starts per sprint aligned with engineering capacity. Route client escalations through CS triage — no bypass. Commit to hiring plan for area owners + cross-training capacity. 10+ new servers onboarded in 3 weeks exceeded stabilization runway.
Assign functional area owners (Week 1). Launch cross-training pair rotations (Week 2). Build calculation regression suite (top 20 client configs). Monthly area health reports from each lead.
Critical Signal
Of 175 Q2 bugs: 38 Critical (22%), 78 High (45%), 55 Medium (31%), 4 Low (2%), 0 Very Low. Every ticket reaches CS as urgent to the customer reporting it, so it gets tagged Critical or High. But severity should measure engineering + business impact, not customer sentiment. The near-empty Medium/Low buckets prove triage is not happening — and that classification is owned by CS + Product, not Engineering.
| Area | Q2 Bugs | Worklio-Related | % Worklio | Accountability |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Payroll | 33 | 14 | 42% | BIZ PROD — partner management (Pay Now, webhook, Everee sync) |
| Sale & Calculations | 28 | 0 | 0% | ENG PROD — internal commission engine |
| Onboarding | 20 | 8 | 40% | BIZ — onboarding pace, Worklio iframe |
~27% of Q2 top-3 bugs trace to Worklio/Everee (partner problem, Business + Product own). The other ~73% is our internal codebase — commission engine, onboarding flow, payroll calculations (Engineering + Product own). Different owners, different fixes, but both need attention.
Primary Action 1/2
Top 3 Q2 bug areas (Payroll 33, Sale & Calc 28, Onboarding 20 — 46% of all bugs) have zero named owners. Ownership is the single highest-leverage change.
Triad per area:
Primary Action 2/2
5 of 6 critical-path engineers have no backup at all (Prem, Niti, Jay, Lokender, Ashutosh Y are solo). Only Farhan has partial cover (Rachna). Any PTO or illness stalls critical work.
Structured plan:
Many of our most disruptive Q2 incidents — Milestone Mortgage emergency (Apr 7), Insight Pest FL/AL stuck closing (Apr 8), Creative 1st Mortgage pending (Apr 7) — landed as URGENT Tier 1 tickets the evening before payroll had to run. They became engineering emergencies only because they were discovered too late.
CS schedules pre-cutoff payroll validation runs for every Worklio client, 1–2 business days before their payroll date. Standard checklist: tax entities, SUTA rates, Worklio worker IDs, Everee sync, pay period state. Issues surface in a scheduled engineering window — during India business hours when possible, not at 8 PM IST.
| Metric | Current (Q2 so far) | 90-Day Target | Accountable |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bugs filed / month | ~171 (Mar) → 175 bugs in 21 days of Q2 (pace ~250/mo) | -25% (target ~128) | All four teams |
| % bugs at Low / Very Low after triage | 2% | 25–40% | CS PROD |
| Engineers with backup on top-3 areas | 0 of 6 | 6 of 6 | ENG |
| Functional areas with named triad | 0 | Top 5 | ENG PROD |
| Regression-test budget in sprint | 0% | ≥15% of capacity | PROD |
| Payroll cutoff emergencies | ~5 in first 21 days of Q2 | 0 | CS |
| % tickets closed with linked PR | ~22% (Kin sample) | 100% | ENG |
Quality Initiative — Engineering Response
Q2 Focus
The corrective measures introduced in Q1 remain active as we enter Q2. Key initiatives including AI-assisted code review, feature flag discipline, and targeted module fixes continue to be enforced. Q2 will measure the sustained impact of these measures across the full quarter.
5
Active
initiatives
Q2
Monitoring
period
Continuing concentrated fix sprints across high-volume problem areas identified from Q1 and early Q2 ticket patterns.
AI PR review workflow scans every pull request for regressions, type errors, and logic issues before human review.
All new features ship behind our home-built feature flag panel, available per server instance — enabling controlled rollout and instant kill-switch.
Q1 Graviton migration and NewRelic APM onboarding complete. Q2 focus on leveraging observability data for proactive issue detection.
New Regression issue type introduced in Q2 to separately track regressions from net-new bugs, improving root cause visibility.