Use case
Give engineering a clear request, not a mystery to investigate
Specify the system, search scope, and evidence needed. Let technical contributors complete focused tasks while the response owner coordinates the wider request.
A familiar situation
Make the technical handoff specific
An engineer receives “please export this customer’s data” with an email address and a deadline. The account may exist in several systems, records may mention other people, and a deletion request may need additional approval. Clear instructions matter before anyone runs a query or changes production data.
Privacy Requests lets the response team assign collection tasks and connect returned evidence to a case. Maintain a system inventory so people know who owns each source. A task should explain the authorized scope and expected result; the tool supplies structure, while your engineering procedures determine how work is performed.
See the actual product screens →From intake to outcome
A practical way to run the request
Define the systems and responsible people
Record useful system names, owners, and fulfillment notes. Keep the inventory current when a product, vendor, or team responsibility changes.
Write a task that can be checked
Describe the account or record to investigate, the relevant scope, and the evidence the owner needs back. Distinguish a search from a separately authorized deletion or correction.
Return findings with context
Complete assigned tasks and attach relevant evidence. Explain the scope of the search and any limitations so the response owner can distinguish no matching records from an incomplete investigation.
Hand the result back for response review
Technical completion is one input to the response. The owner selects disclosure materials, and the Legal Reviewer approves the packet before secure delivery.
Make each responsibility clear
Agree who owns each part before the request is urgent. These are suggested working responsibilities; workspace roles determine access.
| Person | Responsibility | Useful result |
|---|---|---|
| Engineer or Data Owner | Perform assigned work in the relevant system | Task result and supporting evidence |
| Case owner | Define scope and coordinate the request | A collection plan and prepared response |
| Legal Reviewer | Assess the proposed response | Recorded packet approval |
Keep technical evidence useful after the task is done
A result is easier to review when it says what was searched, what was found, and what could not be confirmed. That context helps the response owner ask the right follow-up question without repeating the work. It also keeps responsibility clear: engineers explain the technical result, while authorized reviewers decide what to disclose and how to respond.
Before your first request
Set up the people and the process
Rehearse the whole workflow with controlled addresses and fictional data. A working intake form is only the first step.
See how collection tasks and evidence work →- Name a responsible person for each system in the inventory.
- Write reusable collection instructions for common request types.
- Use the Data Owner role when its task-focused access fits the responsibility.
- Agree how contributors should report incomplete searches or ambiguous matches.
What your team still owns
Privacy Requests is not a data discovery engine and does not automatically query or delete records across your infrastructure. Your team uses its existing tools and access controls to perform the work. Uploading evidence to a case does not automatically include it in the requester’s response; disclosure attachments are selected separately.
Read the security safeguards and current plan availability before deciding whether the workflow fits your organization.
Try a real workflow
Give your next request a clear path
Start with a workspace, a responsible owner, and a reviewer.
Compare workflows for other teams →