## TL;DR
Pull your top 20 ticket types from the data, write each response with placeholders for the personal bits (name, ticket-specific detail), and store them where agents can insert with two clicks. Review quarterly against the ticket data; the top 20 shifts.

## The error
```text
(Efficiency task; no error.)
```

## Steps
1. Pull the top 20 by volume from the last quarter's tickets. Expected: list. Do not guess; the data always surprises.
2. Write each response: greeting with name placeholder, the fix or next step in plain language, what you need from the user if anything, and a sign-off. Expected: written in a human tone, not corporate.
3. Add placeholders for ticket-specific details ([NAME], [SYSTEM], [TICKET]). Expected: templated. Placeholders force the personal touch that prevents robotic replies.
4. Put them in the ITSM macro/canned-response feature, organized by category. Expected: two-click insert. If it takes more clicks, agents will not use them.
5. Review quarterly: retire responses for faded issues, add new top drivers. Expected: maintained.

## When to use
- High-volume repetitive tickets
- New agent onboarding (canned responses teach the right answers)

## When not to use
- Complex or sensitive tickets (write personally)
- Angry customers (personalize, do not macro)

## Compatibility
- Any ITSM with macros/canned responses

## Variants
### Multilingual teams
Maintain the top responses in each supported language.
### Bot handoff
The same responses power chatbot answers; keep them in sync.

## Why it happens
Common tickets deserve consistent, correct, fast answers. Canned responses deliver all three, and the placeholders keep them human.

## Edge cases
- Audit for drift: responses that no longer match current procedure are worse than none.
- Let agents improve them; the best edits come from daily use.

## Provenance

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_RDs5fXwhVNxSkQ_mg-PLSQ