When you cannot decide alone
01In a nutshell #sec_0e0a2b17
Not knowing is a legitimate state, and the product gives you four named ways out — but “doing nothing” is not one of them.
02The pitfall to avoid #sec_e235e7dc
When faced with a case that you don't really know how to answer, two reflexes are bad.
Approve by default, because revoking is scary. You then sign off an access that no one has reviewed, and your name remains on it.
Leave it pending, hoping that someone will take care of it. No one will take care of it: no administrator has the right to decide for you. The request will remain open until closure, and the report will say that it has not been processed.
The four ways out that follow are preferable to the two reflexes.
03Consult — ask for an opinion, keep the decision #sec_a7f12462
Menu … › Consult
You ask for the insight of someone who knows, and you remain the decider. The request does not change hands: it stays in your queue, and it is still your name that will appear on the decision.
When to use it: you are responsible for this access, but you are missing a factual element — what this group is for, if this project is closed.
04Delegate — pass on the decision #sec_24aadfa6
Filter DELEGATED in the status bar
You transfer the decision to someone else, who will decide in their own name.
When to use it: it is not your scope. The person has left, the application has been taken over by another team, the access falls under another manager.
A delegation in REVIEWIT is time-bound and traced. There is no permanent delegation: it carries a reason, a justification and a deadline, and it is revoked rather than deleted — so that the history remains readable.
It is not a way to empty your queue. A delegation to someone who is no more responsible merely shifts the problem and adds a name to the chain.
05Escalate — raise what is beyond you #sec_ec7ff7e1
Menu … › Escalate, or the button ↑ Escalate on a selection
You raise the case to a higher level, usually the workspace administrator, because the question is no longer a matter of individual decision.
When to use it: the campaign asks you to judge a scope that is clearly poorly defined, the resource seems off-topic, or you see a problem that the campaign does not foresee.
Escalation also works in bulk: select the concerned lines, the action bar proposes ↑ Escalate. This is the right move when you find that three hundred lines at a time should not have been addressed to you.
Escalated cases are found under the ESCALATED tab.
06The contestation — the way out that is not yours #sec_713b7ab3
Tab CONTESTED
A contestation is opened by the person whose access has been revoked, not by you. It suspends remediation while the case is re-examined.
It appears in your queue because you are the author of the contested decision, and you are asked to reconsider it in the light of what is brought to you.
This feature is optional: it is set at the workspace level and can be deactivated. If your organization has not activated it, the tab remains at zero and a revocation has no contestation window.
07How to choose, in one question #sec_aa61fbc2
From this access, am I the one who answers?
- Yes, but I am missing a fact → Consult
- No, it is someone else → Delegate
- No, and the problem is the campaign itself → Escalate
08What protects you #sec_3a62c263
Each of these outcomes leaves an attributed trace. A delegation says who passed it, to whom, why, and until when; an escalation says who escalated what.
It is in your interest as much as that of the auditor: the day when one looks for why this access was not examined, the answer will not be “nobody knows”.
09To remember #sec_fa41afc6
Four named outcomes, and one question to choose. The only bad answer is silence — because nobody will come to fill it in your place.