Why unclear processes should not be automated

Automation preserves what you design

It can make useful work faster. It can also reproduce an unnecessary approval, conflicting rule or weak control across every transaction. The technology cannot decide which parts of the current process still make sense.

That is why the work should be understood before the automation boundary is chosen.

Start by observing the real work

Compare the documented process with what staff and users actually do. Follow several items from beginning to end, including an exception. Note hand-offs, waiting, rekeying, unofficial spreadsheets, judgement, control checks and the point at which somebody has to ask for help.

A map is useful only when the people involved recognise it. Treat disagreement and missing information as findings, not as details to smooth over.

Separate three kinds of work

• Process: activities and events that can follow an understood sequence
• Decision: a question resolved through facts, rules, authority and sometimes judgement
• Casework: work where new information or events can change what should happen next

Standards such as BPMN, DMN and CMMN formalise those distinctions. You do not have to use the notations to benefit from keeping a repeatable process, a business decision and an unusual case separate.

Find the exceptions before they find the automation

Ask what happens when information is missing, a person disagrees, a deadline passes, a system is unavailable or a decision needs authorised discretion. Identify who can act, what evidence they need and how the work returns to a controlled state.

An exception should not disappear into an unowned queue. If it needs judgement, make the role and authority visible.

Simplify before selecting a tool

Challenge duplicate entry, unnecessary copies, repeated approvals and reports no one uses. Some problems can be solved with a clearer role, a changed policy, a better form or correct use of an existing system.

Then choose the smallest useful automation boundary. It may be validation, pre-population, a notification, integration that removes rekeying, task routing, an explicit rule or orchestration across several systems. End-to-end automation is not automatically the best answer.

Decide whether the proposed part is ready

• Is the purpose and expected outcome agreed?
• Are normal paths, variants and exceptions understood?
• Are decisions, rules, discretion and authority explicit?
• Is the required information available and permitted for use?
• Are controls and their evidence understood?
• Can integrations fail safely without duplicate action?
• Who will monitor, support and change the automation?

One stable task may be ready while the complete service is not.

Two examples from delivered work

For one New Zealand public-sector organisation, Hot Desk designed integration architecture using secure API gateways to connect established process-orchestration and decision-management platforms with the wider enterprise environment.

For another government organisation, Hot Desk defined a service-oriented target architecture and migration roadmap for replacing a legacy platform supporting a regulated public service after legislative change.

Those sources establish architecture and migration-planning experience. They do not establish measured savings, completion of every implementation or a customer endorsement.

Warning signs that automation should wait

• No owner can approve the target process
• The purpose or completion outcome is disputed
• The rules or delegations are unclear
• Exceptions and manual overrides are not understood
• Required information has no trusted source
• A material control has no owner or usable evidence
• No one owns support and change after release

These signs do not prevent every improvement. They identify the work that needs to be resolved or deliberately excluded before automation proceeds.

Explore our business-process consultancy, read how to turn legislation into requirements or discuss automation readiness.

A note about this article

This is general information from Hot Desk Consultancy Services Limited. It does not certify a process as ready for automation or provide legal, regulatory, privacy, security, procurement, architecture or implementation advice.