Session 2 of 3

Common Process Design PitfallsIdentifying and avoiding common errors found in process improvement design implementations

Session 2 – Design Pitfall Objectives

Understand the fundamental aspects required for proper future state design

Gain basic familiarity with workflow automation software capabilities

Identify four common process design pitfalls that can hinder efficiency in workflow design

Hands On Activity● Process Review● Scenario analysis● Process Improvement/Refinement● Demonstration

Explore potential resolutions to common design pitfalls

Fundamentals of Future State Design

Thorough analysis underpins effective future state design

Effective design also relies on understanding:● Vision of how the implemented

solution will solve the business problem

● In depth knowledge of the range of capabilities that the software platform provides

● Understanding how common missteps affect design

Workflow Automation

Software that integrates the following into a streamlined interface● People● Information (Data & Documents)● Business processes

Fundamental principle● Bringing critical information● To the people that need it ● At the point in time that it’s relevant to

accomplish the task

Some Example Capabilities● User tasks

Workflow Automation

Workflow Automation

Software that integrates the following into a streamlined interface● People● Information (Data & Documents)● Business processes

Fundamental principles● Bringing critical information● To the people that need it ● At the point in time that it’s relevant to accomplish

the task

Some Example Capabilities● User tasks● Wait and Validation tasks● Conditional Routing logic● Automated Data Exchanges and Web Services

Integrations● Notifications

Design Pitfall 1: Over Engineering

Designing for every exception leads to over complication

Will be constantly chasing each ‘new’ exception

Introduces the possibility for inflexibility when new exceptions arise

Impact: ● Increases risk of scope creep ● blown timelines and budgets

Design Pitfall 2: Creating Non-Actionable or Vague Queues

Presenting a queue of work where some tasks cannot yet be processed● Requires constant manual sorting to find

work that is able to be completed

Using vague, role-based names for tasks provide little insight● Verb or action based naming provides hints

to the worker

Impact● Works against principles of workflow

automation● Hurts user adoption ● Ambiguous naming pollutes metrics data

Design Pitfall 3: Under Validation

Assuming that our workforce will always act how we have designed the process● Not accounting for Human Error

Creating dependencies without error handling adds risk

Impact ● Adds overhead for managers to

research and address situations● Issues can “snowball” when automatic

tasks depend on data that hasn’t been validated

● Erodes faith in the system

Design Pitfall 4: Replicating Paper Processes into Software

The “this is the way we’ve done it, so we will continue to do it” mindset● Current state should define the business

requirements – but NOT constrain the future implementation

Not leveraging advantages of software, such as automatic routing, data exchange or parallel processing

Impact● Limits potential for efficiency gains

Current State

Software

Future State

Documentation IconsUser task – This icon represents a step in the process where a user has work to accomplish and is presented with information and actions. Example: Enter Voucher in AP System

Conditional Split task – This icon represents a task that is able to make routing decisions. Example: Invoice > $500

Wait task – This icon represents a task that will hold work until a document or data is present. Example: Wait for Invoice

Start task – This icon represents the start of a workflow process.

Finish task – This icon represents the completion of a workflow process.

Data Exchange – This task represents an exchange of data from the process workflow to or from another database (external or internal). Example: Synchronize Invoice Number

Hands On Activity

Work with the person(s) next to you.

Handout of business process will contain areas that are identified with design pitfalls.

Separate sheet will provide scenarios with backstory from the process users.

Determine what the pitfall is and ways to improve the process.

This hands on activity will last 30 minutes.

Implemented Process Overview

Deny Northern Brew

Purchase Req(Recipe)

Status = New

Resu

bmitt

ed

OK to brew

Missing Signature

PO Created

Reci

pe D

enie

d

Tim

e O

utReceived Received

Tim

e O

ut

Manager Approval

Proc

ess

Vouc

her

Entered

Ship

men

t Re

ceiv

ed

Missing Info

Brewmaster Review

Recipe Submitted

Review Requisition

Wait For Packing Slip

Missing Shipment

Wait For Invoice

Missing Invoice

Wai

t For

In

voic

e

Review Invoice

AP Manager Approval

Brewmaster Approval

Brewmaster Approval

Process Voucher Paid

Appr

oved

Appr

oved

Contact American Yeast

Contact Brew Direct

Contact Northern Brew

Contact Hopology

Close Invoice

Appr

oved

Do Not Pay

Send Documentation To Vendor

Wait For Additional Shipment

Contacted

Contacted

Contacted

Contacted

Deny American

Yeast

Den

y Am

eric

an

Yeas

t

Deny Brew Direct

Den

y Br

ew D

irect

Deny Northern BrewDeny Hopology

Den

y H

opol

ogy

Close Invoice

Do

Not

Pay

Do you still get missing documents?

What do you do with the missing shipments?

Still receiving the wrong invoices for approval?

I heard vendors are complaining about not getting paid!

How is the vendor denial process segment working?

Hands On Activity

Work with the person(s) next to you.

Handout of business process will contain areas that are identified with design pitfalls.

Separate sheet will provide scenarios with backstory from the process users.

Determine what the pitfall is and ways to improve the process.

This hands on activity will last 30 minutes.

Design Pitfall Review

The hands on activity is over

Review each identified section of the process●What was the issue with each section?●What pitfalls did you identify?

Pitfall resolution●How did you correct each identified pitfall?

Example A

Scenario● Brewmaster receives recipes that are missing the

ingredient list● Constantly has to send the requisitions back to

brewer to obtain ingredient list● Would be nice if the system could check for the

ingredient list before sending it to my queue

Purchase Req(Recipe)

Status = New

Recipe Submitted OK to brew

Missing Signature

Review Requisition

Resu

bmitt

ed

Reci

pe D

enie

d

Missing Info

Brewmaster Review

Resu

bmitt

ed

Reci

pe D

enie

d

Missing Info

Brewmaster Review

Wait For Ingredient List & Recipe

Tim

e O

ut

Overview

Pitfalls Identified● Which pitfalls did you identify?● Under validation ● Creation of work pools that are not actionable

Pitfall Resolution● How did you correct the identified pitfalls?● By using a document wait task we can check for all of

the documents or data that is needed at the review step

● If any of the documents or data is missing we can then return the requisition back to the brewer to resolve

Example B

Scenario● The wait period for shipments expires and the

order is sent to receiving to look for the shipment

● Receiving determines that the shipment still has not been received and the vendor should be contacted

● Would be nice if there was a way to send these orders to the AP Clerk to contact the vendor

Overview

Pitfalls Identified● Which pitfalls did you identify?● Creation of work pools that are not actionable

Pitfall Resolution● How did you correct the identified pitfalls?● Creating a user task for the AP Clerk to contact

the vendor allows receiving to remove these orders from their queue

● Limits foot traffic

Tim

e O

ut

Wai

t For

Sh

ipm

ent

Cancel

Ship

men

t Re

ceiv

ed

Contact Vendor For Shipment

Cancel Order

Contact Vendor

Missing Shipment

Wait For Packing Slip

Tim

e O

ut

Ship

men

t Re

ceiv

ed

Overview

Example C

Scenario● Brewmaster and AP Manager receive invoices that they

do not need to approve● AP Clerk is choosing wrong person for approval and not

adhering to the company policies● Would be nice if the system could check the amount

and then route the invoice accordingly

Pitfalls Identified● Which pitfalls did you identify?● Under validation ● Replication of the paper process

Pitfalls Corrected● How did you correct the identified pitfalls?● By using a routing task the process can automatically

verify what the amount is and determine who the invoice should be sent to

● This allows the AP Clerk to simply review the invoice and then let the system route it based on pre-defined rules

Review Invoice

Brewmaster Approval

Manager Approval

ReviewedAmount Routing

>$500<=$5,000

>$5,000

Brewmaster Approval

AP Manager Approval

Overview

Example D

Scenario● Invoices get routed to the wrong contact vendor task● Every time we buy from a new vendor we have to

add a task to the workflow which is adding administrative overhead

● Would be nice if there was a more general contact vendor task and the AP Clerk could make the determination on who to contact

Pitfalls Corrected● How did you correct these pitfalls?● By condensing the individual contact vendor

tasks into a single task we empower the knowledge worker

● Adds flexibility to the workflow

Deny Northern Brew

Contact American Yeast

Contact Brew Direct

Contact Northern Brew

Contact Hopology

Deny American

Yeast

Den

y Am

eric

an

Yeas

t

Deny Brew Direct

Den

y Br

ew D

irect

Deny Northern BrewDeny Hopology

Den

y H

opol

ogy

Brewmaster Approval

AP Manager Approval

Contact Vendor For Denial

Denied

Denied

Pitfalls Identified● Which pitfalls did you identify?● Focusing design to handle all exceptions● Replication of the paper process

Overview

Example E

Scenario● Vendors call and complain that they did not

receive payment● Without validation the AP Clerk is able to process

the work item without entering the voucher● Would be nice if there was a way for the

workflow to verify if the voucher was entered into the AP system

Pitfalls Corrected● How did you correct these pitfalls?● By adding a data sync and an exception task we

are able to instantly validate that the task was actually performed

Process Voucher Paid

Entered

Verify Voucher

Missing Voucher

Corr

ecte

d

Faile

d

Success

Pitfalls Identified● Which pitfalls did you identify?● Under validation● Replication of a paper process

DemonstrationImplementing a Pitfall Corrective Action Within the Existing Process

Up Next: Session 3

Continuous Improvement