Which steps in your process do not have to be done over and over again?
Copying a request, requesting missing data, updating a status or preparing a file: much work consists of recurring steps.
We map those steps and investigate where automation helps. What requires personal contact, assessment or craftsmanship consciously gets a place in the process.
From work process to intervention
We follow a fixed sequence for this.
- 1.Determining task and goal. What should the process ultimately deliver?
- 2.Speaking with stakeholders. Who performs the steps now, and what do they notice?
- 3.Following information and transfer. Where does data go from one system or person to another?
- 4.Finding repetition and exceptions. Which steps recur constantly, and which ones often deviate?
- 5.Choosing what you simplify. Not every step needs to be automated.
- 6.Controlled implementation. The adjustment is implemented and monitored step by step.
Sometimes it is better to scrap an unnecessary step than to automate it. A link or a better input is often already sufficient. Not every improvement needs to contain AI.
This sequence prevents an intervention from being chosen before the underlying problem is clear. A quick technical solution solves little if the cause lies elsewhere in the process.
Exceptions belong to the process
Information is missing, two systems contradict each other, a link does not respond, the wrong employee is assigned a task, or a customer changes their request after submitting it.
For these types of situations, we agree in advance what happens then and who is responsible. Without that agreement, an exception quickly leads to delay or an error that no one notices.
A process that is only set up for the standard situation gets stuck at the first deviation. That is why we work out exceptions in advance, instead of only discussing them as soon as they occur.
What human control means concretely
It is not enough to say that there is a 'human in the loop'. For each step, we make concrete what information someone sees, what decision that person takes, and what is not allowed to proceed without that decision.
In the case of a request, this could mean that an employee sees the prepared data, checks whether it is complete, and only then approves a follow-up step.
Such a control point usually takes an employee little time, while it does prevent an error from proceeding unseen to a next step.
Kitchen Studio as a substantive example
In the Kitchen Studio case, the personal conversation and the sketch continue to exist, while intake, file, available product information and preparation are brought together more effectively.
The original proposal also described concept formation, feedback, revisions and control. This serves as inspiration here for the explanation of the working method in general, not as proof that every component has since been delivered. We do not adopt figures about time savings or automation percentage from that case here; read them in the case itself.
The core of that story is more broadly applicable than just this sector: where information is kept separately in multiple places, an error or delay occurs faster than when that information comes together in one place.
A process map as a working model
- 1.Receiving request. Current action: manual retyping into a second system. Required information: contact details and request type. Possible improvement: automatic transfer via a link. Exception: incompletely filled-in form. Human decision: contact in case of missing data.
- 2.Assessing completeness. Current action: employee checks the file for missing documents. Required information: mandatory fields per request type. Possible improvement: automatic signaling of missing fields. Exception: information that does not fit into a fixed field. Human decision: process anyway or return.
- 3.Preparing data. Current action: data is merged into an overview. Required information: all previously collected data. Possible improvement: automated draft overview. Exception: contradictory data between systems. Human decision: which source is leading.
- 4.Employee checks. Current action: the prepared overview is reviewed. Required information: the draft overview and the original request. Possible improvement: clear display of changes. Exception: deviation that has not occurred before. Human decision: give final approval.
- 5.Follow-up step. Current action: file is passed on to the next department. Required information: the approved file. Possible improvement: automatic assignment to the correct employee. Exception: no available employee. Human decision: determine priority.
Note that 'preparing data' and 'giving final approval' are two different actions. The preparation can be automated, the approval remains human work.
This type of process map makes it visible in one overview where an improvement is possible and where an employee should consciously remain at the wheel.
What you measure
Useful measurement points are time spent, waiting time, rework, completeness of requests and actual usage of a new step. A high automation percentage in itself is not evidence of a better customer experience or a higher margin.
More about the broader trade-off between building, linking and adjusting can be read on the page about technology, and about the collaboration form for development on the page about software development via DaaS. See also AI applications and, for the question of how responsibilities are assigned within an organisation, the article on founder and decision-making.