Process mapping.See how the workreally gets done.
SIXIS follows a process from start to finish with the people who do the work. We make steps, information, decisions and waiting points visible, then agree where to act first.
SIXIS follows a process from start to finish with the people who do the work. We make steps, information, decisions and waiting points visible, then agree where to act first.
Show us a process that crashes See how we workWhen you must understand where time is wasted.
For processes that go through multiple people or systems and have delays, redoes, or differences between the way they are described and the way they work on a daily basis.
Each colleague describes a different route.
We pursue the same cases as the persons involved. We separate the usual steps from the exceptions and see where information or responsibility changes without being clear to others.
The result is delayed, but the cause remains unclear.
We identify moments of waiting, completions and resumes. We check the available evidence to link the blockage to a concrete situation before proposing a solution.
You want to automate, but the process is not stable.
We clarify what starts the activity, what must come to an end and who decides unusual cases. We first choose the simplifications and rules necessary for a safe implementation.
We follow real cases.
We choose what do we change first.
The map must be recognizable by the people doing the work.
SIXIS organizes the analysis and validation of the agreed process. Your firm provides relevant people and cases and approves changes. Implementation of all recommendations, automation or extensive reorganizations are separately established activities.
The SIXIS collaboration modelWe delimit the process and the result.
We choose the starting point, the end, and the problem we want to understand. We determine which teams and types of cases go into the analysis. The clear boundary helps to follow a complete route without expanding the discussion to all the company's problems.
From you Process, desired outcome, participants, and examples of hardship cases.
We track the actual activity.
We talk with executors and go through actual documents or records. We note what information arrives at each step, what verification is done and what happens in practice. Differences from the stated procedure are clarified, without presuming their cause.
From you Access to persons, documents, and some ordinary and unusual cases.
We build and validate the current map.
We show the succession, decisions, surrenders and expectations. We identify input and output roles and information. We bring the map back to the team to correct gaps and confirm that important exceptions are visible, not hidden in an ideal route.
From you Confirmation of steps, responsibilities and exceptions by persons involved.
We analyze bottlenecks and options.
We link the delays or redundancies to examples and check the possible causes. We can propose to remove an unnecessary step, clarify an information or change a teaching. We evaluate effort, dependencies, and impacts before recommending an automation or new system.
From you Work constraints, available resources, and limits on acceptable changes.
We establish priorities and continuation.
We prepare a proposed work variant and the order of interventions, with responsible person and verification criteria. The map and conclusions remain accessible to the team. The company approves what is put into practice, and the implementation is delimited in concrete activities, which can be followed later.
From you The person who approves the direction and those responsible for the chosen interventions.
A WORKING EXAMPLE
An order to the workshop.
Measurements arrive too late.
A furniture workshop redoes the planning when the measurement details arrive after the order is accepted. Mapping follows a few orders back to production to see where information is lost.
- Current route
- We see who receives the request, who measures and which document reaches the planning. We compare a complete case with one that required redoing.
- Blockage
- The team confirms that the acceptance sometimes uses an incomplete variant. We identify what information needs to be verified and who can confirm that it is sufficient.
- Priority
- We propose measurement verification before the affected stage and a responsible for exceptions. Implementing and documenting the new step are subsequent, explicit decisions.
RELATED CAPABILITIES
The map provides the basis for concrete changes.
Mapping describes and verifies the process. Role clarification, instructions, and automation can use the findings, each with a distinct purpose and implementation.
Roles & Responsibilities
The steps and decisions identified receive responsible and approval limits confirmed by the firm.
SOPs
The approved way of working is transformed into instructions that an executor can follow.
Workflow automation
Repeated steps and sufficiently clear rules can be implemented and tested as automation.
Reporting & KPIs
Process outcome and bottlenecks can be tracked through defined indicators and available sources.
What we learn by process mapping.
Limits, people, evidence, and what follows analysis.
Must we have pre-written procedures?
No. We can start from people, documents and real cases. Existing procedures are useful for comparison, but we check how they actually work. The analysis is not blocked by the lack of a formal document, if we have access to the information necessary for the route.
How much time must the team allocate?
Depends on trial, number of roles and variety of cases. We establish from the beginning the necessary people and information and organize discussions with a clear purpose. It helps to have an internal person in charge who can confirm gaps and coordinate access to samples.
Does the analysis seek to find guilty persons?
The goal is to understand how work flows and why difficulties arise. We check steps, information and decisions in context. The roles are described in practice, and the conclusions must help the company choose changes, based on cases and confirmations.
Do I only receive a chart?
The agreed delivery includes route explanation, blockages and intervention priorities, with limits and dependencies. The shape of the map is chosen for the team. A useful representation must be able to lead to verifiable action, not just illustrate the process.
Do you also include the implementation of the recommendations?
We establish analysis and implementation separately. They can be linked in the same collaboration, with clear tasks, responsibilities and costs. Mapping does not automatically mean making all the changes, building systems, or completely redoing the way you work.
Can we analyze only a small trial?
Yes, if it has a sufficiently clear beginning and result. A limited route can show important handovers and bottlenecks. We delineate the relationships with the other processes, so as not to propose a local change that creates difficulties in another team.
What do we do if delay data does not exist?
We use the cases and available information, marking where the observation is incomplete. We can propose a simple collection to check a deadlock. We don't invent durations or volumes, and we don't present impressions as exact measurements of activity.
How do we know that the map is correct?
We go through it with the people involved and with common examples and relevant exceptions. We correct the differences and ask for confirmation of the roles. The map describes the period and limits of the analysis; subsequent changes must be reflected in the version used by the team.
What trial would you like to do you understand better?
Describe the delaying result and show us a recent case. We can delineate the path, people and information needed to identify a useful intervention.