I am using Salesforce for Case Management. I have quite a number of queues (about 250) set up for my various teams and I need all members of a queue to continue viewing cases even after a specific person takes ownership of the case. Due to the high volume of queues/teams, it isn't feasible to built 1 sharing rule for each of these. Public Read-Only OWD also isn't feasible due to data privacy concerns.

Can I simply leave the Cases permanently assigned to a queue so that everyone in that Queue always has access? I could then maybe build a custom lookup field (to User) which can be the "Case Manager", or even use the Case Team for that?

Or is it considered bad practice to have Cases permanently owned by a Queue?

1 Answer 1


The primary concern for this setup would probably be Ownership Data Skew. You'll probably end up with far more records owned by a single owner than you would with individual assignments. I'd suggest using Case Teams to share records with users as appropriate. You could even write a trigger or flow to set up case team members based on a queue or the user's Default Case Team, or maybe even the Account Team Members. There's a lot of options available, so leaving cases in queues is probably the least efficient option.

  • thanks I did think about that, but each of these Queues/Teams would probably only ever manage 500-1000 cases per year max for the foreseeable future. That's a good 10-20 years of runway before ownership skew becomes a problem! With that in mind, do you still think the concern is alleviated enough to make it a viable solution?
    – JustinF
    Feb 28, 2023 at 13:21
  • I considered Case Teams, but that automated solution does mean that if you have 10 people in a Queue, you're creating 10 Case Team records for every single case assigned to that queue. Wouldn't that excessive 10x record volume increase be more dangerous/resource intensive (and cluttering in the UI) than a distant ownership data skew problem?
    – JustinF
    Feb 28, 2023 at 13:34
  • 1
    @JustinF Actually, thinking about it, you could also just do a manual share with the group (CaseShare with UserOrGroupId set to the queue for each case), which you could also automate. I would say that leaving the cases in the queue also limits some kinds of reports, since you're not updating ownership. It's nothing you can't work around, I just don't think it's a clean solution.
    – sfdcfox
    Feb 28, 2023 at 15:31
  • thanks, I really like the CaseShare idea! Exactly what I needed.
    – JustinF
    Feb 28, 2023 at 17:21

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .