Requests get lost between units
When a request concerns several directorates, who is doing what becomes invisible.
FOR MUNICIPALITIES AND PUBLIC SECTOR · PRODUCT DIRECTION
From a citizen request to a solution in the field, on the same record.
Product direction · not offered yetPublic work is not a single application form. The request, the responsible directorate, the field team, budget and authority, statutory requirements and the reply to the citizen all depend on each other.
Municipal directorates, field teams, call and request units, institutional management.
What the institution actually needs
Field and office records are separate
Work done in the field and the office record are kept at different times and in different forms.
Authority and budget limits must be clear
Which step can be taken with which authority and which budget must be visible on the record.
Similar requests repeat
When a recurring problem is handled as a one-off application, the root cause stays invisible.
The reply must be traceable
The stage a request has reached and when it closed must be recorded.
The work MMT would take on
It keeps the request as one record, connects the relevant directorates and steps, reads recurring requests together and moves work forward within the authority limit.
Connects the request to the right units
Which directorates a request concerns and who is waiting for what becomes visible.
Unites field and office records
Work done in the field is written to the same record; plan and actual movement stay separate.
Protects the authority and budget gate
A step requiring authority never runs by itself; pending approval is named.
Makes repetition visible
Similar requests are read together; a root-cause study can open as separate work.
Keeps the reply traceable
Stage and closure are recorded; what the citizen was told stays visible.
Example: from a citizen request to a field solution
Illustrative example; not a real institutional deployment.
- The request is recorded and the relevant directorates are connected.
- An on-site inspection is planned; plan and actual movement stay separate.
- The field team writes its finding into the same record.
- A step needing authority and budget appears as pending approval.
- After approval the work moves forward; the action and its date are recorded.
- If similar requests repeat, a root-cause study opens as separate work.
- The request closes; what the citizen was told stays on the record.
The records a request leaves
Illustrative example; not a real institutional deployment.
request_record
Stages, the directorates involved and closure information.
field_finding
The on-site note; plan and actual movement kept separate.
pending_authority
Steps waiting for authority and budget.
repetition_view
Similar requests read together and the root-cause work.
What would be read on screen once it opens
This area is not open yet. The example below is the intended record format, not a working product screen.
Subject: neighbourhood-level demand for more frequent public transport. Source: the municipality's own request records (last 12 months, 1,842 requests). Finding: 38% of the requests concentrate on two stops, mostly between 07:00 and 08:30. No recommended decision is issued; the basis is presented and the decision stays with the responsible unit.
stop,requests,time_window North Square,402,07:00-08:30 Industry Junction,298,07:00-08:30
What was counted: the subject tag and stop field on each request; free text was not interpreted. What was excluded: repeat requests from the same person within 24 hours (312 records), shown separately. Gap: two stops have no August data, and the summary states this at the top. A basis, not a recommendation: the service-frequency decision stays with the responsible unit.
What a version difference would look like
When a new period of data arrives the summary takes a new version.
When the period grows
The numbers are recomputed; the earlier period's summary stays for comparison.
When the scope changes
Which request types were included is written into the record.
Where the decision stays with the institution
Prioritization, budget use, granting authority and any official notice to a citizen belong to authorized staff and management. MMT does not interpret legislation and never stands in for authority.
What you keep
- Every stage of the request and the units involved
- Field finding and office record in the same place
- Pending authority and budget steps
- A shared view of recurring requests
- Closure and the information given to the citizen
Status in this releaseThe public sector product is not offered by subscription yet. The shared foundation under controlled evaluation: work records, unit and access rules, file attachment with verified preview, decisions and history. Real connections to institutional systems require separate authority and agreements; no ready integration is offered. Access depends on account permissions. Public sales are not open.
See how this would work in the public sector.
See clearly which part works today and what still awaits external authority.