1. An introduction to Participative Process Reviews
Welcome participants to the workshop
Delegates introduce themselves and advise their current level of experience in regard to process reviews.
Workshop set up requirements
Room requirements: A large room equipped with a PC, projector, sound, internet connection, flipchart stand and paper, optional whiteboard
Room layout: Key requirement is formation of one long table minimum 1 meter in width to enable rollout of plotting paper. Ideally space to move around table for discussions
For the workshop
This presentation
Workshop handouts including a copy of the draft terms of reference
For process mapping activities
Roll of paper
We recommend 36” (914 mm) CAD plotting paper rolls average price £22 per roll
Double strength lining paper is usually smaller at 540mm but cheaper
1 meter long ruler (or long straight edge ) to draw up swim lanes
Post it notes (various colours) 76mm by 127 mm and 76mm by 76mm
Flip chart paper and pens (white board markers)
Scissors
Blue tack
Suggest in advance that the Process Study Review leader bring a camera device which can record images of output materials from the day.
An introduction to Participative Process Reviews

2. An introduction to
Participative Process Reviews workshop
Acknowledgements
This workshop is brought to the HE sector as a collaborative initiative with
Oxford Brookes University (the workshop originator)
Leadership Foundation in Higher Education’s Innovation and Transformation fund
SUMS Consulting
6 participating Universities who assisted in piloting the workshop.
Acknowledgments
This workshop comes to the sector as a collaborative effort as above
More information can be found about the key collaborators at the following links.
Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development
LFHEs Innovation and Transformation fund
Sums Consulting

3. Being curious helps Story Courtesy of Professor Zoe Radnor
Professor of Service Operations Management
Loughborough University
Story Courtesy of
Being curious helps
A key requirement from participants for the day is that they bring their curiosity with them.
(use can use this animated story to reveal the punch line)
The following is a synopsis of a story told by Prof Zoe Radnor key note speaker at SUMS HE Process and Change Forum (Monday 18 June 2012) and relates to a commission she was undertaking for an NHS hospital in Wales.
Story synopsis (as remembered by delegate)
Zoe Radnor was undertaking an operational efficiency exercise linked to an NHS hospital in South Wales. Part of her time was spent observing the paper work a typical Ward Sister (male equivalent Charge Nurse) had to complete during their shift. One particular form which caught her curiosity was a requirement to record which members of staff had come to work by bike.
The Ward Sister advised she completed these and sent them to HR every week. Zoe followed the process trail. The HR administrator collated all the completed forms from all over the hospital. The information was logged. The forms stored into lever arch files and once full went to archiving. Asked what the information was used for the administrator advised that the task had been passed on to her by her predecessor. Her line manager was also vague as to why the bike information was being collated and for what purpose.
Further curiosity and investigation revealed that the information was important at the time of the process inception.
Up until the mid 1950s staff coming to work by bike were entitled to extra coupons for their ration books.
The hospital had duly been collecting the data ever since!
Facilitator are encouraged to use this synopsis to illustrate points pertinent to their audience.
Image of Ration Book source

4. Key aim
To equip designated staff teams with the knowledge and skills to conduct a process review
The key aim of this workshop is To equip designated staff teams with the knowledge and skills to conduct a process review
Key observation:
For participants this workshop can be viewed at multiple focus levels
at the first focus level some participants will be interested in the specifics related to the days process review study
the second focus level is to enable participants to gain overview of PPRs to enable them to participate in future self directed process reviews
the third focus level is to enable those taking on the role of Process Study Review leader with the insight to carry out more involved process reviews in the future
Note: This workshop adopts a simple approach to process mapping whilst acknowledging that a whole plethora of advice is available to satisfy people who would like to progress to greater complexity.

5. Learning Objectives By the end of this workshop you will be able
An introduction to
Participative Process Reviews
Learning Objectives
By the end of this workshop you will be able
describe the key stages involved in carrying out a process review in a general context.
write a robust terms of reference thereby focusing the process review and gaining commitment from key decision makers
apply effective interviewing and facilitation skills required to engage participants in conducting a process review
conclude the review through writing a concise report with recommendations
consider the use of producing process maps using Lucidchart or Microsoft VISIO
Out line the Learning Objectives for the workshop.
Facilitators are free to amend and tailor objectives to their needs.
Facilitator observation: On this slide I often highlight the Steven Covey habit of “Begin with the end in mind”.
The end in mind for this workshop is that participants will have the necessary information to enable the Process Study Review Leader to compile and write a concise report. The report should be written in a way that will make something (positive) happen in the future.

6. Workshop outline Introduction (aims and objectives)
Participative Process Review Workshop
Workshop outline
Introduction (aims and objectives)
Session 1: A general approach to process reviews
Session 2: Creating a robust Terms of Reference
Stage 1: Definition stage
Stage 2: Plan and prepare
Session 3: Gathering process information
Stage 3: Initial diagnostics
Key skills (interviewing and facilitation) for effective diagnostics
Break
Session 4: Introduction to process mapping
Stage 4: Defining the current (as is)
Lunch
Session 5: Stage 5: Design proposal for a new process
Overview of Lucidchart / VISIO
Session 6: Presenting your proposals for Stage 6: Write report
Session 7: Decisions and next steps
Workshop outline as per slide
Plus Domestics
Refreshments / Lunch arrangements
In case of a fire (exits)
Toilets
Any special needs
Facilitator observation: Please note
No timings are specified on this slide as the day is designed to be fluid linked to pace and discussion points raised by participants.
In piloting the workshop the following observations have been made
Session 2: Discussions to review and amend the initial Terms of Reference may take longer than envisaged as key information and viewpoints are raised. This is invaluable as it reduces potential tensions and issues further down the review. It also assists in encouraging empowerment and transfer of process ownership to the team.
Session 4: Stage 4 Defining the current (as is process) often takes longer than anticipated. This is where many of the issues are revealed/highlighted and then discussed. Participants often start going into problem solving mode which is not necessarily to be discouraged by the facilitator who may ask the loggist to record possible solutions for Stage 5.
Session 5: Stage 5 is often shorter in duration in part due to the many problem solving discussions during stage 4.
Occasionally a team need to agree to meet again to complete their sessions (often due to the eventual realisation of the complexity of the process under review).
Note: It may help to manage expectations up front by advising that Participative Process Reviews are not usually completed in just one day, the aim of the workshop provides knowledge and insight. 6

7. Key workshop booklet (pdf)
SUMS Consulting have kindly agreed to make their Participative Process Change Good Practice Guide available to the sector.
Parts of this workshop will make reference to materials in this guide.
Delegates are able to download their own pdf copy from the PPR tool kit to keep for future reference.
As a member of the consortium Oxford Brookes often bring in SUMS Consulting to review the larger University processes which often benefit from having external perspectives and certain detached independence.
Key workshop booklet (pdf)
Curtesy of SUMS Consulting

8. A General approach to process reviews
Session 1:
A General approach to process reviews
Facilitator Observation: Sign post to participants that the facilitator starts with front loaded information at the beginning of the workshop which tails off over the day as the group go further into their actual process review .

9. Process mapping (a definition)
Structural analysis of a process flow (such as an order-to-delivery cycle), by distinguishing how work is actually done from how it should be done, and what functions a system should perform from how the system is built to perform those functions.
In this technique, main activities, information flows, interconnections, and measures are depicted as a collage on a large sheet of paper, with different coloured 'Post-it' notes or slips of paper. This graphic representation allows an observer to 'walk-through' the whole process and see it in its entirety. Source Business Dictionary .com
Facilitator Observation: This definition of process mapping represents one of the closer fits relevant to this type of workshop.

10. Potential uses for process mapping
To address identified issues
quality of services to students or other customers
performance issues i.e. excessive response times
resource constraints or controlling costs
redress excessive or unbalanced work loads
To investigate new ideas
enhancing service standards
re-sequencing activities
introducing organisational changes or role changes
exploiting new information systems
Quality assurance to ensure activities are
efficient and effective (continuous improvement)
aligned to University strategy and policies
benchmarked
The facilitator may wish to add or subtract to these lists.
At this point you may wish to discuss with participants which of the above apply to their process under review.

11. Publisher: Harper Collins
Facilitator Observation: The PPR workshop makes linkages to the customer focused strategy of  ‘Moments of Truth’ used by Jan Carlzon, who managed the Scandinavian SAS Airlines in the 1980s. He used the term to mean those moments (often less than 15 seconds) in which important brand impressions are formed by customers and where there is significant opportunity for good or bad impressions to be made.
Moments of Truth often happen when they are not thought to occur, in odd interfaces with staff and moments with key deliveries of service.
First impressions are often critical moments. When customers (in our context students as co-creators) have certain expectations and they are disappointed, then they can form very negative impressions or feel a sense of betrayal.
Moments of Truth require organisations to slow down time in watching customer interactions and questioning how these can be improved.
For this to be achieved Carlzon espoused that a customer-orientated company is one that is organised for change and SAS would not survive with detached, administrative top down leadership. He concluded that service and front line people who actually delivered the service were the success leavers.
Carlzon, J (1989) Moments of Truth, New strategies for today’s customer driven economy, Harper Collins
Publisher: Harper Collins

12. No special meal SAS Airlines: Story example 1
Moments of truth on enquiry of a vegetarian meal
A customer has ordered a vegetarian meal via his travel agent and enquires about his meal request with check-in staff. The check-in agent unfamiliar with the food service asks the customer to enquire at the departure gate. A friendly representative at the departure gate advises that the food service is not within their remit and advised the customer to check with the cabin crew. The customer asks a cabin crew member about his vegetarian meal. The plane is about to take off, “You should have contacted us earlier” she reprimands. “There would have been no problem if only we had known in time.”
The airline had ruined three interactions or ‘moments of truth’.
The airline subsequently made a number of changes in how they were organised for the customer. This included a member of the cabin crew being present at the pre-flight briefing session to review all passenger data including special requests; they then located themselves with the check-in staff to be on hand to answer queries. Staff were empowered with permissions to take responsibility for customer issues without having to wait for supervisor’s permission. Once the passengers are checked-in the cabin crew representative moves onto departure gate and is again available to answer queries. Far more problems and issues are now solved on the spot.
Facilitator notes For full story account refer to Moments of Truth Carlzon, J (1989) page 61

13. SAS Airlines: Story example 2
Transferring planes at Copenhagen Airport
In this example an organisations assets and procedures were organised for the convenience of the operators at the expense of the customer experience.
On transiting Copenhagen airport from New York to Stockholm, Jan Carlzon together with other tired and baggage laden business travellers had to transfer between different terminals half a mile apart. On enquiring why the inter-connecting flight could not be within the same terminal the reply was that the wide bodied planes used this terminal as it was close to the service hanger, whilst the Stockholm flight was more convenient for domestic operations.
The moment of truth was that planes at Copenhagen were being positioned for what was most convenient for the planes and the ground handlers.
SAS Airlines today (at Copenhagen) now regularly tow planes between terminals. Fewer customers now have to change terminals. The results are passengers have a much better transit experience, delays caused by waiting for passengers are minimised and this in turn reduces airline costs.
Facilitator notes For full story account refer to Moments of Truth Carlzon, J (1989) page 53
Questions to consider within the University environment
 When considering interactions with (a) our students as co-creators or (b) staff colleagues
● what do we consider to be our key “moments of truth”?
● do we know whether we succeed or disappoint in those moments?
● are we organised to best serve our students or staff colleagues?
● if we could change an aspect of our offering what would it be?
● and how would we do it?

14. Establish initial (rough) process map
A staged approach to process mapping
Establish ToR for the process review
Articulate objectives (possible problem) (desired outcomes),
scope, stakeholders, time frame, process review team
Stage 1:
Definition
Agreed
Determine who is to be interviewed
Plan and prepare schedules, communication et al
Stage 2:
Plan & prepare
1 to 1
diagnostic
interviews
Group
Diagnostic
Stage 3:
Initial diagnostics
NB : also consider
Questionnaires
Linked to participant handout sheet
The following two (reveal) slides summarises the whole process for a PPR.
Information relating to each stage is laid out in the PPR tool kit.
Establish initial (rough) process map
(establish issues, dependencies, risks, stakeholders, equality impacts)

15. A staged approach to process mapping
NB: More than 1
workshop depending
on size and complexity
of process
Facilitated
Workshop
Current process map and logs
used to identify present issues
Stage 4:
Defining the
current (as is)
process
Stage 5:
Design proposal
for a new process
Facilitated
Workshop
NB: More than 1
workshop depending
on size and complexity
of process
Proposed process map and logs
used to identify potential requirements, actions et al
Stage 6:
Write report
Report includes,
Definition of as is process together with proposal for any new process.
Highlights, issues, dependencies, linkages, risks and other key impacts
Recommendations with outline of cost and resource implications
May lead to development of project Business Case

16. The key to good process mapping
“There are three essentials that must be handled well to assure good process mapping.
The operating people whose work is being mapped must supply information for the map and must understand and support the reasons for the mapping.
2. The map itself must be organized in a way that enables everyone
involved to clearly understand the process.
3. The information that is assembled in the map must be valid”
Source:
Permission is granted to post, print and distribute this document in its original PDF format.
Facilitator Observation: It is recommended that you send this one article out to participants as part of their pre-joining instructions.
Contained in the article is pragmatic and reassuring advice aimed at encouraging people who actually do the work to contribute to the process review by recognising them as being the top factual authority.
Ben S. Graham,
The Ben Graham Corporation 2006

17. Participant roles in process mapping
Process Sponsor (Owner)
may or may not own whole process
Process Study Review Leader
prepares the brief,
co-ordinates the process review
prepares the final report
Workshop recorder/loggist
captures the outputs from the workshop day,
Process Review Team Members
provides experience, knowledge, challenge & creativity
Process users
should have representation on review team
sample interviewed as part of the process review
Student views should be sought where ever students are end users
Overview of Participant roles in process mapping
Facilitator Observation: This is a good point to clarify in the workshop who is taking on which roles.
Also re-emphasise the importance of the recorder/loggist role for the workshop.
Advise that this may occasionally result in you the facilitator to signal a pause in proceedings to allow the loggist to capture important points to be included in any subsequent output report.

18. Creating a robust Terms of Reference
Session 2:
Creating a robust Terms of Reference
Compiling and then completing with agreement a Terms of Reference is a very important part of a process review.
In this session participants will spend time reviewing the draft terms of reference for the process under review which were sent as part of the pre-joining instructions.

19. An accurate definition
Stage 1: Definition
Terms of Reference
An accurate definition
is critical to success
Background
Process review objective
Scope
Criteria for success
Proposed approach
Who is involved (stakeholders)
Time Scales
Resourcing
Ancillary/supporting notes
Overview of the headings which might typically be included in a Terms of Reference.
A ToR template is supplied as part of the PPR tool kit to which a University can affix its own branding logo.
Alternatively a ToR can take other forms such as an elongated letter. Exemplar copy of the SUMS ToR for an enquiry to enrolment process review at Oxford Brookes is in the handouts.

20. Process Review Team Activity 1
The team to review and finalise their Terms of Reference
(15 mins).
Team to agree their process review Terms of Reference .
This is the first of the key workshop activities.
Time guide is an estimation only
Facilitator Observation: Its important that those in the room come to a consensus in agreeing the ToR to enable full and willing participation for the rest of the day.
This is part of the process in gaining commitment to review with a possible outcome in making changes.
Note: On some workshops the facilitator updates a live copy on the screen. Delegates refined and agreed wording as it was typed. The update version was then redistributed to participant mail list with an understanding that a final wordsmith exercise would be carried out by the review leader, post the workshop.

21. Stage 2: Plan and prepare Planning for the review study
Stakeholder identification
Communication plan
Interviews, meeting and workshop logistics
identifying who to interview
diarising meetings
Set up process review documentation
Utilising project management log techniques
Key impacts
Stakeholder
Assumptions
Risks
Dependencies
With this slide the facilitator describes what would happened in stage 2
(noting the workshop won’t have time to cover much of this activity on the day).
Facilitator Observation: Stakeholder identification and communication planning is key for process success especially if the process under review is a contentious or delicate in nature. Example a review of a University car parking policy and procedures is usually highly emotive for all concerned.
Process Study Review Leader should not under estimate the time required to setting up interviews and workshop logistics.
A Process Study Review Leader may also benefit from adopting key impact log templates often associated with project management techniques and apply these to the PPR. These can be used to capture key impacts when they arise in interviews and discussions.

22. Stage 2: Plan and prepare
Background preparation
Collation of existing documentation related to the process, examples being
policies, procedures, guidance notes et al
operating manuals/documentation
current forms used
organisation charts
screen shots of web and system applications
database extracts and reports
relevant KPI data
Collation of any sources of user/customer feedback
Financial costing's associated with process
Carry out initial (basic) SWOT analysis on current environment related to process. This can be built on in stage 3.

23. Process Review Team Activity 2
1/ The team to produce a list of documentation et al
to aid their process review. (7 mins)
2/ Carry out a quick SWOT analysis linked to their chosen
Process review area (10 mins).
Note on SWOT analysis
Strengths: characteristics of the process that are valuable have advantages and should be retained in any new process form
Weaknesses: of the processes characteristics that place the process at a disadvantage to its desired aims and objectives.
Opportunities: elements that the process could exploit to its advantage.
Threats: potential elements in the environment that could cause trouble for the process in the future.
Depending on the size of the workshop the facilitator may wish to conduct as a group exercise or split up into sub groups with report backs.

24. Establish initial (rough) process map
Session 3:
Gathering process information
1 to 1
diagnostic
interviews
1 to 1
diagnostic
interviews
1 to 1
diagnostic
interviews
Group
diagnostic
interviews
Group
diagnostic
interviews
NB : also consider
Questionnaires
Stage 3:
Initial diagnostics
Establish initial (rough) process map
(establish issues, dependencies, risks, stakeholders, equality impacts )
In Stage 3 the Process Study Review Leader may often conduct a series of initial diagnostic sessions to gather and understand information related to the process review this could consist of
1 to 1 diagnostic interviews with key stakeholders (e.g. managers, key people who operate the process, end users, suppliers)
group diagnostic interviews
observation sessions (experience the process first hand)
compiling and conducting and evaluating questionnaires with key users.
In this initial diagnostic/information gathering stage the process study reviewer is clarifying/assessing information, understanding issues/ sensitivities, history, roles and responsibilities.
In this session participants will consider the skills and aptitudes required for a Process Study Review Leader.

25. Process Study Review Leader
An effective
Process Study Review Leader
Interviewing skills
Questioning, Listening, Probing
Presentation
& report writing
Facilitation skills An
effective
Process
Reviewer
Common
sense
Independent
& Detached
Key skills and aptitudes for an effective Process Study Reviewer
To be effective the reviewer needs to have the following skills and aptitudes
Effective interviewing skills, questioning techniques, listening, probing,
Facilitation skills
Independent detached, challenging. The person acting as reviewer needs to have the confidence to conduct the review factoring out the potential of undue deference to superiors. Challenging received practices and generating new ideas, representing alternative views.
Being curious (link back to coming to hospital bicycle scenario)
Good analytical skills, able to analyse, order and make sense of a large collation of information.
Presentation and report writing with ability to be concise in summarising the review
Has some general knowledge, experience of the process area under review. Having an understanding of HE terminology and current issues can help speed a process review.
Where possible it is beneficial to co-opt a colleague who is not directly involved in the process under review as this ensures greater independence and detachment.
Analytical
Challenging
Curious &
open mindedness

26. An effective Facilitator
(Behaviours & Skills)
Creating empathy
and trust
Good at
briefing
Neutrality An
effective
Facilitator
Common
Sense /
Intuition
Active listening
Key skills and aptitudes for an effective facilitator
Expand where applicable.
Facilitator Observation: On intervention skills I highlight that is as much about knowing when not to intervene as to when to intervene.
Observation from piloting the workshop is that the facilitator increasingly takes a background role as participants gain confidence the team gels and some take on the facilitation role themselves.
Intervention
Skills
Questioning
Observation

27. A facilitator helps individuals and groups achieve their goals.
Facilitation skills
A facilitator helps individuals and groups
achieve their goals.
The Facilitators role
is a neutral servant of the group
does not evaluate or contribute ideas
focuses energy of the group on a common task
suggest alternative methods
protects individuals and their ideas from attack
encourages everyone to participate
helps the group find win/win solutions
co-ordinates pre and post meeting logistics
As per slide:
Also draw attention to Facilitators check list provided in the hand outs
Facilitators check list
start out and agree ground rules with the group
keep proceedings moving; sustain momentum, give a kick group a kick start where necessary
give information if absolutely necessary, but try not to be too directive; resist the temptation to be a leader rather than a facilitator.
encourage participation
ask questions to draw them out on issues
ensure fair play i.e. don’t let some people dominate the proceedings by talking over others
handle conflict when it arises (don’t ignore it)
set accepted levels of behaviour
manage the time
keep the group on track. Don’t allow them to go off at spurious tangents (or know when to direct them back to the task in hand)
moderate where there are disagreements, but remain neutral; don’t be drawn into evaluation
remind them at opportune times that they are required to present their findings (where appropriate)
and finally
don’t own the discussion/outcomes; its theirs not yours
Key to success: Involving others

28. Facilitation skills Advice from a few leaders in their field
understand group dynamics (Kurt Lewin)
be client centered (Carl Rogers) ownership and responsibility for the problem must lie with the client
be process aware (Edgar Schein) facilitation is a process of helping clients find their own solution self diagnosis achieved by use of effective questioning.
As per slide

29. Asking helpful and challenging questions to
clarify
‘Are you saying that … ?’
try to understand
‘Could you explain so-and-so a bit more … ?’
follow through a train of thought
‘You said a moment ago that … if that’s the case, what would happen if … ?’
mirror
‘So what you’re saying is … ?’
open up new avenues
‘Have you explored/thought of … ?’ or
‘Would … be of any help?’
challenge
‘What do you feel most uncomfortable about?’ or
‘What do you feel most challenged by?’
elicit honesty
‘Do you feel you’re making any impact – and if not, what can you do about it?’
unpeel layers, to dig deeper
‘And then what happened … ?’
check out
‘Are we asking helpful questions?’ or
‘What haven’t we helped you with yet?’
As per slide
From: Krystyna Weinstein Action Learning: A Practical Guide Second Edition Gower 1999 p113.

30. Process Review Team Activity 3
1/ In preparation for session 4 the team to agree a set of ground rules
Facilitator observation: If time is short and the facilitators judgment is that only a small benefit will be achieved from undertaking this activity then just discuss in general terms and highlight any key requirements from the group.
Most groups will be able to put together a set of ground rules relevant to the situation in hand.
Here is an example   
All focus on one conversation. One person speaks at a time, side conversations are taken away from the group.
Fairness: No one will be called on twice on a particular topic until all those who want to have spoken once.
Be constructive. Create a positive context and supportive framework Acknowledge the past fully, yet focus on the future.
Test assumptions and inferences. Ask for more information.
Be specific. Use examples if needed so people know what you're talking about.
Take responsibility for your own feelings and experiences. Use “I” statements (for example,
Keep it real, keep it relevant. Be honest. Be direct, yet kind.
Bring un-discussable issues into the open.

31. Introduction to process mapping
Session 4:
Introduction to process mapping
Stage 4: Defining the current (as is)
Facilitator observation: This is the session that most often participants have been looking forward to being involved in.
A short introduction to the techniques and materials will make way for a longer period of activity.

32. Process maps Process mapping some thoughts
They help facilitate an objective discussion on
Issues related to a current process
Ideas for improved processes
A powerful tool to
analyse current processes
and
designing improved processes
A pragmatic process map is better than a perfect one
and
Use common language to
gain a common understanding
The corresponding conversation is often
more important than the process map itself
Some general observations to set the scene.
Facilitator Observation: The corresponding conversation is often more important than the process map itself. Time and again I have witnessed how having time for a structured conversation around a process map has revealed issues, assumptions, misinterpretations of policy or understandings, conflicting importance's etc.
Analogy: When an aboriginal is in the act of creating a (wall) painting it is a live painting because the artist is also telling and conveying a story with feelings to those around them. Once the painting is dry and the artist and audience have left the painting is just a left over remnant of the story.

33. Observations from the PPR research initiative
Reviewing a big process seems daunting until you map it out
Collaborative nature of the exercise develops an appreciation of what’s involved and the amount of work which goes on within the process
Inclusiveness and sense of co-ownership fosters engagement and cooperation across teams /depts.
Great value of having the right people in the room, giving them facilitated time to talk and think things through
Appreciation of diverse/different roles/responsibilities and perspectives to remove difficulties/obstacles
Through constructive challenging, simple issues and solutions often become apparent
PPRs bring out many assumptions which often hinder effective working, these can be discussed and clarified
Sample observations taken from the PPR research initiative which can be found in the PPR tool kit.

34. Standardised Process mapping shapes
Start and end points
In VISIO
A task/activity within the process
A sub task/sub activity within the process
Direction of flow
Decision e.g. yes or no
Document
Standardised Process mapping shapes
Notes:
When writing a task use action verbs (e.g. Pay invoice, receive goods, enter application on database)
Arrows are used to indicate the flow of work or alternative flow options dependent upon decisions made.
Drawing the process map
Inputs and outputs should be identified first. A clear definition of key inputs and outputs must be provided.
Start and End points as well as customers should be clear.
Start with a high-level Flow Diagram and then drop to the next level of detail if necessary. Use sub-processes.
Walk through each key sub-process step by step. Stay focussed here.
The level of detail should be adequate to describe located inefficiencies.
Identify process and technology opportunities for improvement as you go to the end of each sub-process.
A person not familiar with the process should be able to understand the flow easily without any further explanation.
Note: This workshop adopts a simple approach to process mapping whilst acknowledging that a whole plethora of advice is available to satisfy people who would like to progress to greater complexity.
Data
Database access storage
Next page reference
Off page connector

35. Process mapping swim lanes
Swim lane diagrams show what is done by whom and in what sequence.
Key responsibilities for the process (these can vary for each process review i.e. departments or roles) are each assigned a swim lane.
A swim lane could be allotted to specific information systems which is very useful when the review centers around introducing new IT systems.
Facilitator observations (advice to participants)
If you are using 36” (914 mm) CAD plotting paper rolls then 6 lanes are often optimum number of swim lanes to draw on the paper.
First task: for the group is to write on flip chart the key players to be considered for the swim lanes
Second task: decide in which order to assign the players onto the process map with the following suggestions
put the customer (client/student) at the top lane for purposes of contextualising customer/student experience
predict which of the busiest groupings should be kept close together (to avoid dramatic arrow flows up and down the swim lanes)
consider keeping bottom lane for Misc. (where one off participants play a small part in the process).
Encourage participants to consider allocating different colour post it notes to differentiate between roles if this occurs within the same swim lane.
Note: This workshop adopts a simple approach to process mapping whilst acknowledging that a whole plethora of advice is available to satisfy people who would like to progress to greater complexity.
Source image: SUMS Consulting: Participative Process Change, Good Practice Guide

36. Process Review Team Activity 4
1/ Using the materials provided develop
The “as is” process map for your designated process review.
Top tip: hold back from drawing connecting flow lines until near the end of the activity as these often change through discussions
2/ Produce the accompanying session diagnostics
notes highlighting issues, observations, actions et al
50 minutes (depending on level of complexity of process)
The DO’s and DON’T’s of Process Mapping
DO’s
DO map the process as it actually happens.
DO talk to the other people who are involved in the process.
DO define the beginning and end of the process before you start.
DO the process map at a high level. Keep it simple and illustrative.
DO work in a team. Seek advice.
DON’T’s
DON’T map the process as you think it happens or as you think it ought to happen. Do not interpret.
DON’T restrict your process map to activities relating to the department that primarily runs the process.
DON’T attempt to start process mapping before having identified the process’ beginning and end.
DON’T get bogged down with too much detail.
DON’T struggle on your own.
Top tip: hold back from drawing connecting flow lines until near the end of the activity as these often change through discussions
Facilitators observation: When the participants have completed their as is map encourage the Process Study Review Leader to take photographs (in case post it notes fall off).

37. Review your process from a Lean perspective
Waste
How much demand and work is triggered by failure, rework and duplication?
Which stages of the process deliver no value to the customer?
Where is there non-value adding waste in the process
Customers & Value
Who are the customers of the process?
What is the value the process delivers to these customers?
Flow
Is the process “push” (i.e. set items produced regardless) or “pull” (i.e. customer demanding a service)
Where are the bottlenecks?
How does the “lead time” (waiting) compare to the “process time”
How many people and stages are involved?
Perfection.. In an ideal world….
How many process stages would be required?
How long would it take?
How many people would be involved?
Linkages to Lean thinking
The PPR workshop makes linkages to the concept of Lean thinking.  Lean thinking in its broadest sense is a holistic and sustainable approach to do more with less. Lean represents a culture in which organisations continually look to eliminate wastefulness in delivering value to a customer. Key requirements in creating a Lean environment are
Maintaining an unrelenting focus on providing customer value
Delivering what is needed by the customer at the right time
Keeping things moving (flow)
Apply various techniques to examine and eliminate root causes of waste  
Continuous learning and making everyday improvements  
Taking a long term view (Lean is a journey not a destination)  
Building long term relationships with all stakeholders
Respecting people
For Lean to succeed the last point is arguably the most important. In Lean its people who create value. They are more important than tools, equipment or capital. Its people who implement processes and utilise equipment.  Rooting out waste through Lean depends on creating the right culture and environment where people are respected.
Lean thinking originated in the manufacturing sector (synonymous with Toyota) and has subsequently spread to other sectors.  The Leadership Foundation for Higher Education has a useful development tool kit dedicated to Lean management which is available to members   

38. Design proposal for a new process
Session 5:
Design proposal for a new process
Facilitator observation: In preparation for this session cut the roll of plotting paper from the previous “as is” process (suggested take photo/s) and if feasible display on a wall. This will enable participants to make reference to the process when considering the design of a new process.
Seek if possible volunteers who would like to convert paper version of process maps into more formalised process maps using specialist software
(a useful career enhancing skill to have).
Next two slides quickly relate to two process mapping software solutions Lucidchart and Visio
and an introduction to VISIO and Lucidchart

39. Lucidchart provides the easy to use flowchart software to help you communicate visually.
It is designed to work efficiently with google docs (also available on ipads)
For quick overview summary go to
For further information on Lucidchart go to
Lucidchart provide free accounts for single users
Once you are signed up for your free limited account you may wish to "get the free educational upgrade" by going to the account settings and selecting the upgrade button.
For even more functionality you can apply to Lucidchart for an educator or faculty account
Lucidchart says “We love working with educators and faculty members, since we see Lucidchart as the perfect solution to diagramming needs in the classroom.”
Demo clip

40. Obtaining a user licence for VISIO
Most Universities have special licensing arrangements for Microsoft products
Please liaise with your ICT department or equivalent.

41. what are we looking to achieve from this map?
Process mapping
what are we looking to achieve from this map?
Example prompts
Better end user response /satisfaction
reduce mistakes, rework and errors in communication
Quicker turn around times
reduce delays, waiting and queues
Reduce duplication of effort
Introduction of improved systems
Introducing new services
More accurate information
Transferring of functions from dept to another
Reduce antiquated or unnecessary tasks
We have always done it but can’t remember the reason why (NHS Hospital weekly bicycle stats)
As per slide
Facilitator observation: At this point in may be useful for the loggist/recorder to summarise some of the key points they have logged so far, these may include
key changes to the Terms of Reference
findings of the SWOT activity
findings / issues / actions / assumptions / decisions / proposed solutions arising the previous as is process map.

42. Process Review Team Activity 5
Produce a process map for a proposed new process.
As per slide

43. once you have your process map
Process mapping
once you have your process map
and then “Kaizen”
a culture of sustainable continuous improvement
an encouragement of continual questioning, review, analysis and improvement
Facilitator observation: At the end of completing the new process map ask delegates to reflect on the activities they have undertaken to date.
This slide highlights concept of Kaizen which is about nurturing a culture of sustainable continuous improvement.
Once the process maps have been transferred to a digital version the task of refining and improving them will become easier.

44. Session 6:
Presenting your proposals for
Stage 6: Write report

45. Presenting your proposals some thoughts
Report includes,
Definition of as is process together with proposal for any new process.
Highlights, issues, dependencies, linkages, risks and other key impacts
Recommendations with outline of cost and resource implications
Stage 6:
Write report
Reports will vary depending upon the original need
refer back to the original Terms of Reference
Prioritise your proposals from most important downwards your proposals should be considered in terms of their
desirability linked to strategic aims and freeing up resourcing
feasibility with regards implementation
Be as brief as you can be and make it easy to read and understand.
As per slide

46. Process Review Team Activity 6
Using flip chart and pend outline what will be
in your process review report
Key findings
Key proposals
Next step actions
As per slide
15 minutes

47. ?
Session 7:
Decisions and next steps

48. Decisions need to be made for next steps
Owing to the wide spectrum of variables involved in process reviews
this workshop is unable to provide suitable guidance
Variables include
size and nature of the process under review (Small / Large)
whether a process crosses department boundaries
simple cost effective changes vs large resource investment
is the next step writing a project business case
further investigation required
consult with stakeholders
regulatory considerations to consider
employee relation issues
As per slide
Over to the Process Review Sponsor

49. Process Review Team Activity 7
What next?
5 minutes
Over to the sponsor

50. The
end
End of workshop not the process review