THE SHORT ANSWER
Before automating, eliminate work that does not need to exist, simplify the remaining path, and standardize only the parts that benefit from consistent handling. Automate after the purpose, input, rule, owner and exception path are clear.
ELIMINATE → SIMPLIFY → STANDARDIZE → AUTOMATE
| Decision | Question | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Eliminate | Does this step create necessary value or control? | Remove a report nobody uses |
| Simplify | Can fewer steps produce the same outcome? | Use one intake form instead of two |
| Standardize | Which repeated inputs and rules should be consistent? | Define one approval threshold |
| Automate | Can a system perform the stable step reliably? | Route complete requests automatically |
Remove complexity before encoding it
- Challenge approvals that never change an outcome.
- Stop recollecting information already available and appropriate to reuse.
- Replace duplicate status messages with one source of truth.
- Reduce notifications to actionable exceptions.
- Retire reports with no owner or decision.
- Combine handoffs that add delay without expertise.
Prove the simpler process manually
Run the simplified path with representative cases. Check quality, exceptions, responsibilities and customer impact before encoding it. Automation makes rules faster and more consistent; it does not make them correct.
Apply the idea to one real workflow
Choose one current workflow. Record the present outcome, the proposed change, the accountable owner, the most important exception or failure, and one before-and-after measure. Test the smallest safe version before expanding it.
Sources & further reading
- Map and understand a user's whole problem
GOV.UK Service Manual. Public-service guidance on mapping journeys, collaborating across boundaries and locating pain points. The module adapts the method to business workflows.
- Agile tools and techniques
GOV.UK Service Manual. Practical guidance on user stories, prioritized backlogs and collaborative delivery. User stories support discussion; they do not replace design and technical analysis.
Examples and exercises are illustrative unless attributed to a source. No independent expert review is claimed.
A correction, a counterexample or an experience worth sharing?
Join the conversation ↗