iDatix PEX Week Workshop Part 2

1. Session 2 of 3
Common Process
Design Pitfalls
Identifying and avoiding common errors found in process
improvement design implementations

2. 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

3. 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

4. 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

5. Workflow Automation

6. 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

7. 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

8. 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

9. 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

10. 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
Future
State
Software

11. Documentation Icons
User 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
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
Start task – This icon represents the start of a workflow process.
Finish task – This icon represents the completion of a workflow process.

12. 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.

13. Implemented Process Overview
Contact American Yeast
Still receiving the wrong
invoices for approval?
Do you still get
missing documents?
How is the vendor denial
process segment working?
Deny
American
Yeast
Contacted
Wait For
Additional
Shipment
Brewmaster Approval
Deny Brew Direct
Contact Brew Direct
Contacted
Brewmaster
Approval
Wait For
Packing Slip
Wait For
Invoice
Received
Review Invoice
Received
Process Voucher
Do Not Pay
Time Out
Recipe Denied
Time Out
Missing Signature
Purchase Req
(Recipe)
Status = New
Deny Northern
Brew
Close Invoice
Do Not Pay
Contact Northern Brew
Contacted
Approved
PO Created
Deny Brew Direct
Review
Requisition
Deny American
Yeast
OK to brew
Approved
Brewmaster
Review
Deny Hopology
Recipe
Submitted
Send Documentation To
Vendor
Contact Hopology
Contacted
Manager
Approval
AP Manager Approval
Deny Northern Brew
Missing Info
Wait For
Invoice
Shipment
Received
Resubmitted
Approved
Deny Hopology
Missing Shipment
Missing Invoice
Process Voucher
Entered
What do you do with
the missing shipments?
Close Invoice
I heard vendors are complaining
about not getting paid!
Paid

14. 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.

15. 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?

16. Example A
 Scenario
Overview
●
Recipe
Submitted
Wait Brewmaster List
For Ingredient
Review
& Recipe
●
●
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
Resubmitted
Resubmitted
 Pitfalls Identified
●
Brewmaster
Review
OK to brew
Missing Info
Missing Info
Recipe Denied
Missing Signature
Purchase Req
(Recipe)
Status = New
Time Out
Recipe Denied
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
Review
Requisition

17. Example B
 Scenario
 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
Time Out
Time Out
Wait For
Shipment
●
Wait For
Packing Slip
Shipment
Received
●
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
Shipment
Received
●
Overview
Contact
Vendor
Contact Vendor For
Shipment
Missing Shipment
Cancel
Cancel Order

18. 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
Overview
Brewmaster Approval
Brewmaster
Approval
>$5,000
Review Invoice
 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
Amount Routing
Reviewed
>$500
<=$5,000
Manager
Approval
AP Manager Approval

19. Example D
●
 Pitfalls Identified
●
●
●
Which pitfalls did you identify?
Focusing design to handle all exceptions
Replication of the paper process
 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
Contact American Yeast
Deny
American
Yeast
Brewmaster Approval
Deny Brew Direct
Contact Brew Direct
Denied
Deny Northern
Brew
Contact Northern Brew
Contact Vendor For
Denial
Deny Brew Direct
●
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
Deny American
Yeast
●
Overview
Deny Hopology
 Scenario
Contact Hopology
AP Manager Approval
Deny Northern Brew
Denied
Deny Hopology

20. Example E
●
●
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 Identified
●
●
●
Which pitfalls did you identify?
Under validation
Replication of a paper process
 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
Verify Voucher Paid
Entered
Success
Failed
●
Overview
Corrected
 Scenario
Missing Voucher

21. Demonstration
Implementing a Pitfall Corrective Action
Within the Existing Process

22. Up Next: Session 3
Continuous Improvement