Start with one workflow and an honest status
Choose a process that crosses a handoff: a customer request becoming a quote, an approved job becoming an invoice, or a document becoming an operational decision. Write down where it begins, where it ends and who depends on the result. A whole-company review is difficult to act on until individual workflows are visible.
Copy the tables into your own document. Review recent examples with the people involved, including an exception or failed handoff. Record the review period, the evidence and its owner. Use redacted samples when sharing outside your team; a planning conversation does not need passwords, customer records or financial account access.
Use evidence statuses instead of a readiness score
| Status | Meaning | Next action |
|---|---|---|
| Verified | A recent example and a responsible person support the answer. | Keep the evidence and revisit it when the process changes. |
| Gap | The expected rule, data or handoff is missing or inconsistent. | Name the smallest correction and its owner. |
| Unknown | The team has not checked this yet. | Define what to inspect before choosing a solution. |
| Not applicable | This check does not apply to the selected workflow. | Record why; do not silently treat it as complete. |
No pass mark
This is a planning aid, not a certification or maturity benchmark. A single unresolved approval or ownership issue can matter more than several verified items. Discuss the consequences of each gap rather than adding up ticks.
1. Processes: can the team explain the same sequence?
| Check | Evidence to look for | If there is a gap |
|---|---|---|
| The trigger and completion point are explicit. | A recent request traced from receipt to an agreed final state. | Define what starts the work and what “done” means. |
| Each handoff includes the required information. | What the next person actually received, including missing fields. | Agree a small handoff checklist before automating it. |
| Approval is separate from notification. | Who authorized a price, release, payment or change, and when. | Define authority and a visible approval record. |
| Exceptions have a route. | An incomplete, revised, duplicate or cancelled request. | Name who resolves it and how normal work resumes. |
Ask two people to describe the same case. If their versions differ, settle the rule before encoding it. A clearer form, a shared checklist or a named review step may be enough. Software should not make an unresolved disagreement happen faster.
2. Data: which record should people trust?
| Check | Evidence to look for | If there is a gap |
|---|---|---|
| Important fields have an authoritative source. | Where customer identity, job status and invoice balance are maintained. | Assign ownership by field; one tool need not own everything. |
| Records can be matched across tools. | A customer or job identifier that survives each handoff. | Agree identifiers and rules for duplicates before syncing. |
| Missing or invalid information is visible. | Examples with absent units, attachments, addresses or approvals. | Show the missing item and who can correct it. |
| Access and retention fit the work. | Who needs each field, where exports go and how long copies remain. | Limit unnecessary copies and confirm existing company requirements. |
Do not assume the newest value is correct. Decide how corrections, conflicting edits and archived records should behave. For billing handoffs, use the existing QuickBooks and CRM integration checklist to examine matching, approvals and reconciliation in more detail.
3. Tools: what can your current setup already do?
| Check | Evidence to look for | If there is a gap |
|---|---|---|
| The tool inventory reflects actual use. | Product, plan, purpose, owner and current workflow for each tool. | Identify unused subscriptions and unofficial spreadsheets before replacing anything. |
| Existing configuration has been tried. | A test of fields, permissions, notifications or templates in your plan. | Check available settings before requesting a new application. |
| A proposed connection supports the required operations. | Supported fields, direction, timing, limits and failure behavior. | Test a native connector with a normal case and an exception. |
| Data can leave the system when needed. | A sample export and a way to recover important attachments. | Confirm practical access before migrating or building around the tool. |
Document a specific limitation, not just “the software is bad.” For example, a connector may create an invoice but not carry the approved job reference your team needs. The custom software versus SaaS guide helps compare options once the gap is clear.
4. Owners: who keeps the process working?
- Business owner: name who decides the process rules and accepts the result. A software administrator may not have authority to approve pricing or billing changes.
- Daily operator: identify who reviews the queue, corrects missing information and checks that work reached the next person.
- Exception and backup owner: state where failures go when the usual person is unavailable. A shared inbox still needs someone accountable for checking it.
- Change owner: agree who updates instructions, access and mappings when a product, team member or workflow changes.
Evidence can be simple: a named role in the process document, a real example of an exception being resolved and a backup who understands the task. Avoid assigning every responsibility to one busy person without checking their capacity.
5. Measurement: can you tell whether a change helped?
- Volume: record completed cases over a stated period and note unusual peaks. Keep estimates visibly separate from counts.
- Time: distinguish active work from waiting. A request open for two days did not necessarily take two days of staff effort.
- Exceptions: count missing information, corrections or failed handoffs using a consistent definition.
- Quality and ownership: choose a measure that reflects the goal, such as requests complete before review, and name who will review it.
- Comparison: define the sample, review point and conditions for continuing, changing or stopping a pilot.
The existing manual-work calculator can organize a workload estimate. Its output depends on your inputs and is not a savings forecast. Keep human review, training and ongoing maintenance in the decision.
Turn the review into one decision
Choose the smallest useful next step
| Finding | Likely next step | Evidence before proceeding |
|---|---|---|
| Rules or ownership are unclear. | Improve the process without new software. | A shared sequence, owner and tested exception path. |
| The process works, but people re-enter the same approved data. | Configure or connect existing tools. | A tested mapping and a way to detect and resolve failures. |
| A confirmed requirement remains after testing existing options. | Evaluate a focused custom component. | A bounded gap, acceptance criteria and maintenance responsibility. |
| The process is infrequent or the consequences are small. | Keep it manual and review later. | A documented reason and a trigger for reconsidering. |
Write a short decision record: workflow, verified evidence, unresolved questions, chosen next step, owner and review date. Then use the 2027 automation roadmap to compare candidates and plan a pilot. The 2027 planning hub brings the three decisions together.
Frequently asked questions
Do I need to complete this for every process?
Start with one important workflow and its handoffs. Expand the review when you have a useful method and a reason to examine another process. A complete company inventory is not a prerequisite for a small improvement.
Does an unknown answer mean we need custom software?
No. It means you need evidence. Clarifying a rule, checking a product setting or assigning responsibility may resolve the issue without development.
Is 2027 a deadline for replacing our systems?
No. It is a planning horizon for this campaign. Your operational needs, capacity and tested requirements should determine timing.
From planning to a next step
Bring one workflow and the gaps you found
Describe the tools involved, the people responsible and the handoff that needs attention. We can discuss whether a process change, integration or focused custom project fits.
Review my operations for 2027