Enrolment is the part that goes wrong
Almost every support ticket is an enrolment problem wearing a different hat.
A learner who cannot see their course, a trainer who cannot mark work, a report showing forty people where there should be thirty-eight: these arrive as separate complaints and are usually one thing. Somebody is enrolled where they should not be, or not enrolled where they should be, or enrolled twice through two different mechanisms that do not know about each other. Enrolment is where the platform touches every other system in the organisation, and every join between systems is a place where records drift apart.
The drift usually starts with a good intention. Manual enrolment is added as a stopgap while a data feed is fixed, and then the feed is fixed but the manual enrolments stay, so some learners now have two paths into the same course. Or a self-enrolment key is issued for one cohort and shared beyond it. Or a cohort synchronisation is set up alongside an existing category enrolment and both remain active. None of these is wrong on the day it is done. The problem is that each one is invisible afterwards unless somebody goes looking.
The practical defence is to be able to answer one question quickly: for any given learner in any given course, how did they get there? If the answer takes more than a minute to find, the enrolment arrangement is too complicated to reason about, and it will produce the kind of bug that consumes a full day. Reducing the number of ways a person can arrive in a course is nearly always worth the disruption it causes, because it converts a class of mysterious failures into ordinary ones.
The other defence is a periodic look at who is enrolled with elevated rights. Roles are granted generously in the moment and revoked almost never. A staff member who covered a course for three weeks in a busy period may still be able to see and change assessment records years later. That is not a hypothetical risk in a system whose whole purpose is holding evidence.
There is a variant of this problem that catches experienced administrators too. Enrolment methods interact with completion tracking, so a learner enrolled through a second path can appear to have progress reset, or can hold two sets of progress that the reporting layer averages into something meaningless. The symptom is a report nobody can reconcile, and the cause is three levels away from where anybody is looking. Reducing the number of enrolment paths therefore does more than tidy the administration; it removes a class of reporting fault that is extremely expensive to diagnose after the fact.