Process Experiments
Part of Sustainable productivity
Reviewing whether an efficiency gain simply moved work elsewhere
Trace a process change across every hand-off to find displaced effort, longer queues or added corrections before declaring a gain.
To review a claimed efficiency gain, trace work from request to a result the recipient can use. Compare effort, waiting and quality before and after the change for everyone involved. A faster step may leave the process no lighter if another role now sorts, checks or repairs the work.
State the claimed gain
Name the step that changed and the expected improvement. ‘The intake team no longer enters requests twice’ is more useful than ‘the process is more efficient’. Define included work, its start and finish, and the review period. Include open items so a favourable completed-item average does not hide a growing queue.
Check whether case mix, quality requirements or demand changed too. A simple before-and-after review can identify where to investigate; it cannot by itself prove that the process change caused the result.
Trace the hand-offs
Choose comparable items from before and after the change. Ask the requester, maker, reviewer and recipient what each had to do. Include clarifying requests, finding missing information, correcting rejected work and explaining results again.
| Point to check | Before the change | After the change |
|---|---|---|
| Intake | Who captured and clarified the request? | Who does that work now? |
| Production | What had to be prepared? | What was removed or added? |
| Review | Who checked the result, and when? | Has checking moved or grown? |
| Recipient | Could they use the result? | Do they need more follow-up? |
Fill the comparison from actual work records and conversations. The table is a review tool, not evidence of a saving.
Look for transferred work
Ask whether fewer steps for one team mean more messages for a customer, a longer specialist queue or more corrections after handover. Include service cover and the work of maintaining the new process. Moving work may still be worthwhile if the new owner is better placed and properly resourced; make that choice explicit.
Consider a hypothetical form that lets requesters select a service category. Intake may do less sorting, but specialists may have to reassign incorrectly categorised cases. Check actual reassignments, effort and usable resolutions before deciding whether to keep the form, improve its guidance or restore an intake check.
Ask affected workers whether the new route changes their workload or control over the work. A time measure may miss those concerns.
Pros and Cons of Moving Work to Another Team for Efficiency
- ProsSpecialists may handle work better if they’re closer to the outcome. Can reduce delays if intake is overloaded.
- ConsMay increase workload for specialists, lead to longer queues, require more corrections, or reduce worker control over process. Risk of hidden costs in service cover or rework.
Decide what the evidence supports
Separate observations from uncertainties. Keep the change if the intended result improved without an unacceptable cost elsewhere. Revise a hand-off that needs a clearer rule or more cover.
Pause or reverse the change if essential service or a required check is compromised. Record the owner of the next version and when comparable work will be reviewed again.
Steps to Review an Efficiency Gain Without Moving Work Elsewhere
- State the claimed gainDefine the changed step, expected improvement, included work, start and finish, and review period. Include open items to avoid skewed averages.
- Trace the hand-offsCompare comparable items before and after. Interview all roles involved—requester, maker, reviewer, recipient. Use actual records and conversations.
- Look for transferred workCheck if reduced steps for one team increase messages, queues, corrections, or maintenance effort. Assess whether new owners are properly resourced.
- Decide what the evidence supportsSeparate observations from uncertainties. Keep changes that improve outcomes without unacceptable cost elsewhere. Pause or reverse if essential checks are compromised.
