Workflow analysis

Process evaluation: Workflow Analysis Methodologies

In the next phase of the Rapid Response methodology, the study designers will:

Choose a methodology to map the current workflow of the process under review.
Use the selected methodology to study and map the current process workflow.
Promote workplace efficiency and effectiveness by revising the current process workflow.
Implement the workflow improvement strategies.
Re-evaluate the process workflow if any changes were implemented.

Notes

When planning a process workflow analysis, consider the strengths and weaknesses of each methodology outlined in Table 1, and select the most appropriate method for your particular study.

Table 1: strengths and weaknesses of three workflow analysis methodologies

Study Attribute	Time-motion	Work-sample	Kaizen-event
Study Duration	Long-term some intensive observations are needed over longer a period of time	Medium-term many less intensive observations are needed over a medium period of time	Short-term kaizen Events involve intensive effort of numerous people over a very short period of time
Subject interference	Medium subjects are continually shadowed for lengthy periods of time by the researchers, which can be distracting and/or disruptive to the subjects work	Low a researcher that continually changes study subjects can often-times go un-noticed by their subjects, allowing them to continue their work as normal	High several subjects must be removed, full time, from their workplace in order to participate in the Kaizen Event
Depth of analysis	High every detail of the task can be recordeed and analyzed by a time-motion study due to the 1:1 subject to researcher ratio	Low as no one task is followed in full by the researchers, only apprximations can be made about the true duration of tasks	Medium each task can be analyzed in full; however, self-reporting biases can come into play, when the subjects are describing their own tasks
Breadth of analysis	Low because so much time is spent analyzing each task,only a limited number of tasks can feasibly be analyzed	High because only a small amount of time is spent on each task, a large number of tasks can be analyzed	Medium the amount of time discussing each task, and thus, the total number of tasks discussed is dependent on the Kaizen Event group leader
Overall measure confidence	High Time-Motion studies empirically capture all process activities performed by a subject	Low Work-Sample studies can only estimate the activities that compose a process	Medium all subjective assumptions derived by the Kaizen team are empirically validated through short term Time-Motion observations