The rules change from one conversation to the next
People handle the same case differently because the rule itself is not settled. Automation would make the disagreement faster, not smaller.
DECISION GUIDE — AUTOMATION READINESS
Is this workflow ready for automation?
A workflow is ready for automation when it has a clear starting event, a visible end, reliable information, written decision rules, known special cases, and one person responsible for it. If people still disagree about the rules or rebuild the work from memory, fix the process before automating it.
/READINESS TEST05 CHECKS
- 01The work has a clear start and finish
- 02The required inputs can be found
- 03Routine rules are explicit
- 04Unclear cases go to a person
- 05Someone owns the result
If all five checks are clear, start with a small trial.
Do not automate a disagreement.
Software can enforce a known process. It cannot resolve unclear ownership, conflicting policy, or evidence that nobody trusts.
Each check supports the next one.
A task needs more than repetition. It needs reliable information, clear decision rules, a plan for special cases, and an owner.
- 01 — START AND END
The work has a clear start and finish
READYA specific event starts the work, and anyone can see clearly when it is finished.
WAITThe work starts whenever someone notices a problem and ends when people stop asking about it.
- 02 — INFORMATION
The required inputs can be found
READYThe person doing the work can name the records, fields, documents and systems needed for a normal case.
WAITImportant information lives in private messages, in people's memory, or in documents nobody can reliably find.
- 03 — DECISIONS
Routine rules are explicit
READYThe team can tell apart fixed rules, sorting decisions, decisions that need business judgment, and decisions that law or regulation controls.
WAITDifferent people apply different rules, but the company treats every result as equally correct.
- 04 — SPECIAL CASES
Unclear cases go to a person
READYKnown special cases go to a named person for review, with the information needed to decide.
WAITThe new system would have to guess when data is missing, rules conflict or a case is unusual.
- 05 — OWNERSHIP
Someone owns the result
READYOne role is responsible for how the process works, how success is measured, and whether automation expands or stops.
WAITThe software team builds it, but nobody is responsible for whether the result is correct or useful.
Some problems need repair before software.
A pause is useful when it prevents a broken rule or unreliable record from becoming a faster source of errors.
The source record cannot be trusted
Missing IDs, duplicate records and conflicting versions mean the system cannot tell which information is correct.
Nobody can say what success looks like
The team wants less manual work but cannot describe the correct result, which special cases are acceptable, or what record is needed after each action.
Get one complete process working before giving the system more authority.
The first version should complete one useful process and show every stop, review, action and result.
- 01 — OBSERVE
Collect ordinary and difficult examples
Follow one finished case, one special case and one stuck case through the tools, chats and emails people actually use.
- 02 — DEFINE
Write down the allowed steps
Write down each status, the information needed, who may do what, when a person must review, what happens when something fails, and who is responsible for the result.
- 03 — PROVE
Run one complete process
Start in draft mode, where a person reviews every proposed action. Compare the system's work with your team's before giving it more authority.
Questions that change the decision.
Readiness depends on your process, not on how new or popular a tool is.
Does a repetitive task automatically qualify for automation?
No. Repetition helps, but the task also needs reliable information, a clear result, and safe handling of special cases and failures.
Can we automate a process that still changes often?
Automate only the parts that do not change. Keep rules that still change as settings you can edit, or leave them with a person, until your team agrees on them.
What if the workflow depends on human judgment?
The system can collect the information, run routine checks, prepare a recommendation, and send the final decision to the responsible person.
Do we need perfect data before starting?
No. You need enough reliable data for one small, clearly defined process, and a clear rule for what happens when required information is missing or contradictory.
What is the smallest useful first automation?
Choose one frequent workflow with a visible start, a checkable result, a known owner, and enough examples to test ordinary and exceptional cases.
NEXT.01 — ONE PROCESS
Show us the workflow. We will check whether it is ready.
Share what starts it, who owns it, the information it uses, its decisions, its special cases and the result you need. That is enough to start.