Lesson 4 · 20 min
With the map in hand, the temptation is to pick the slowest step and put an agent on it. Before that come three verbs, in this order: eliminate what doesn't need to exist, simplify what's needed but too big, and redesign what's in the wrong place. In this lesson you take apart Horizonte's process and talk with Carlos, who wanted to skip all of this.
Start the lesson
Objective: take the process apart before automating: cut, simplify, and move steps, with the reason for each change written down.
Each step uses the map from lesson 3. Automating comes last. Click each step.
Competency 2 of the AI Management Area (INEMA): should this process still exist? Eliminate, simplify, redesign, and only then automate.
From 13 steps (v1.0) to 8 (v2.0). Fictional study company; the discount policy is the same as in the agents course.
Start with the H and P steps on the tagging sheet. For each one, ask: who used what this step produced? Every step you cut fed someone, even if it was just a Friday report.
Cut only when that person has another source. Otherwise the habit comes back in hiding: someone recreates the spreadsheet on their own the following week.
The sales spreadsheet (step 3) fed Patrícia's targets report; the report will now come out of the app. The paper (6), the notice (9), and the email (10) go away when stock and finance see the order on screen; the retyping (11), when the order passes from the app to the ERP on its own.
Checking everything is born from a scare and stays forever. Within two weeks, someone who approves a hundred things a day approves without reading, and the check turns into a rubber stamp.
Swap it for two things: the exceptions the rule already defines, checked one by one, and a small sample of the common cases, looked at every week to see if the rule is still right.
Patrícia stops checking 170 orders a week. She sees only the discounts between 5% and 10% and the orders above R$ 5 thousand (fictional study policy), plus 10 common orders drawn at random every Monday.
The costliest error is the one found late. If a rule can be checked as soon as the case arrives, checking it at the end only guarantees rework: the case has already moved on, and it comes back.
Move the check to where the error is born, and merge the steps that were only separate because they belonged to different people.
An order only enters the app with a customer whose record is complete. A new customer goes first to Juliana to be registered. Case P3, which came back from finance and took 75 hours, stops existing this way.
The redesigned version has fewer steps, and each one has a reason. Now it makes sense to ask who does each one, and the answer comes in the next lesson.
Some steps don't change owners: the approval above the policy amount, the invoice, and the judgment calls. They get smaller and better informed, not automatic.
v2.0: order on WhatsApp → built in the app only with a complete customer record → policy applied, exceptions go to Patrícia → inventory sees it on screen → picks and records the stock removal → order goes to the ERP without retyping → invoice → invoice to the customer.
Simulated conversation for practice. The owner wants to put the agent into the process as it is; you lead the redesign. The comment appears right after each answer.
Choose your answer. The comment appears right after, and the conversation continues based on your choice.
One line per step of v1. Every change has a verb, a reason, and who depended on it. The tabs show Horizonte.
REDESIGN SHEET · process: <from where to where> · from v<1.0> to v<2.0> Owner: <name> · Made by: <name> · Date: <dd/mm/yyyy> · Based on: map v<1.0> Verbs: ELIMINATE · SIMPLIFY · MOVE · MERGE · KEEP | # v1 | Step | Verb | Reason | Who used the result and where they'll get it now | Risk of the cut | How to tell it was missed | |---|---|---|---|---|---|---| | <1> | <...> | <verb> | <...> | <name · new source> | <...> | <signal you will watch> | REDESIGNED VERSION (v<2.0>) | # v2 | Step | Who does it (provisional; decided in lesson 5) | Came from (# v1) | |---|---|---|---| | 1 | <...> | <...> | <...> | COUNT: v1 = <n> steps · v2 = <n> steps · eliminated <n> · simplified <n> · moved <n> WHAT STAYS WITH PEOPLE (requirement, judgment, exception): <list>
You are an operations manager and you will review the redesign of a process at my company. Do not approve or reject. For each step that was ELIMINATED or MOVED: 1. Say who probably used its result and whether the sheet gave that person another source. 2. Point out a risk the cut may create that the sheet does not mention. 3. Suggest the signal that would show, in the first two weeks, that the cut was missed. At the end, say whether any real requirement (law, contract, approval of an amount, invoice) was cut by mistake. Map v1: """<paste>""" Redesign sheet: """<paste>"""
WhatsApp order → invoice · v1.0 → v2.0 · Horizonte, fictional study company
| # v1 | Step | Verb | Reason and new source |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | Copy to the spreadsheet | eliminate | habit; the targets report comes from the app |
| 4 | Check everyone's price | simplify | only policy exceptions + 10 sampled per week |
| 6 | Print and take to stock | eliminate | handoff; stock sees the order on screen |
| 9 | Notify that it was picked | eliminate | handoff; the stock write-off in the app notifies |
| 10 | Email to finance | eliminate | handoff; the order goes to the ERP |
| 11 | Retype into the ERP | eliminate | only existed because the app and the ERP don't talk to each other (how to connect them: lesson 5) |
| 12 | Check the record and issue the invoice | move | the record check moves to intake (a new customer goes through Juliana first); issuing the invoice stays |
| 4 and 5 | Simplified check and approval above R$ 5 thousand | merge | become a single exceptions queue for Patrícia |
| 1, 2, 7, 8, 13 | Reply, build, check stock, pick, send the invoice | keep | real requirement (customer, stock, invoice) |
v1 = 13 steps · v2 = 8 steps: 5 eliminated, 4 and 5 merged into a single queue, and an automatic handoff from the app to the ERP in place of the retyping.
Who does each step is still provisional: that's lesson 5. Writing the agent's authority limit action by action is course G3.
Horizonte's conversation and sheet to practice with; your own process's to do it for real.
Run the simulation to the end. If you don't reach the maximum score, start over. Then write, for each of the five lines, one line on why the answer scored 2 is better than the one scored 1.
Done when: you scored 10 out of 10 points and have the 5 lines written, one per line of dialogue.
Use the map you made in lesson 3 and the tagging sheet from lesson 1. Fill in the redesign sheet for the 13 steps without looking at the tab, and only then compare. Run the prompt about what could break.
Done when: all 13 steps have a verb and a reason, every eliminated step has who used the result and the new source, v2 has between 7 and 9 steps, and approval above R$ 5 thousand and the invoice are still there.
Build the redesign sheet for your process from the map in lesson 3. Show the new version to the people who carry out the eliminated steps and ask what they would lose. Adjust the sheet with their answers.
Done when: the sheet has every step from v1 with a verb and a reason, at least 2 steps cut or moved with a reason and a new source, the v1 × v2 count, the list of what stays with people, and the name of who you consulted.
4 questions. The explanation appears after your attempt.
Question 1 of 4
What is the right order for the redesign?
Question 2 of 4
You are going to eliminate copying the order into the spreadsheet. What do you need to do first?
Question 3 of 4
The manager checks the price on every order since a scare with discounts. What is the simplification?
Question 4 of 4
A customer order with no CNPJ is only discovered at billing, after picking. Which verb solves it?
Choose an option. The explanation appears after you try.