A consultant sets up a Sales Accelerator work queue for an SDR team and configures an assignment rule to distribute inbound leads evenly using round-robin logic. After go-live, one SDR's queue fills far faster than teammates', even though the rule treats all SDRs equally. Reviewing the SDR's user record in Sales Accelerator, the consultant finds their capacity value set much higher than the rest of the team's. What should the consultant do to fix the imbalance?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
Round robin sounds fair by definition, but it's not blind, it's still working within limits set for each person, and one of those limits was left too high. So the rule keeps handing that person leads long after everyone else's queue is full, not because the logic broke, but because it's doing exactly what its settings tell it to do. Switching to manual assignment doesn't touch the real problem, it just hands the same lopsided situation to a human to sort out by hand going forward. Spinning up a duplicate queue for the one overloaded person creates a mess of reporting and doesn't address why they were overloaded to begin with. And tweaking how leads qualify to enter the sequence affects the front door, not how work already inside the queue gets divided among the team. The actual lever here is the per-person capacity setting, bring it back in line with everyone else's.
Full Explanation
The correct answer is D. In Sales Accelerator, each rep's capacity setting caps how many open items the assignment engine will route to them at once; round-robin logic still respects that cap, so a rep with an unusually high capacity value keeps receiving new leads long after teammates with normal capacity have filled up, producing the imbalance the consultant observed. Lowering that value back in line with the rest of the team restores the even distribution the rule was designed to produce. Option A is incorrect because switching to manual assignment removes automation entirely and does not address the actual misconfiguration, it just shifts the same imbalance onto a manager's judgment. Option B is incorrect because creating a duplicate queue for one SDR fragments reporting and does not fix the capacity value causing the overload, the same imbalance would reappear in the new queue. Option C is incorrect because sequence priority affects which leads qualify for entry into the sequence, it has no effect on how the assignment rule divides workload across reps within the same queue.