THE SHORT ANSWER
Start with one outcome and trace a real recent case from trigger to output. Record every activity, decision, owner, handoff, system, input, delay and exception. Validate the map with the people doing and receiving the work.
Map START → TRIGGER → ACTIVITY → DECISION → HANDOFF → OUTPUT
- Choose one workflow and a clear boundary.
- Follow one normal case and one exception.
- Write steps in the order they occur.
- Mark the owner and system for every step.
- Use branches for real decisions.
- Add waiting time, rework and missing information.
- Confirm the map with participants.
Evidence & context: GOV.UK Service Manual
Use a lightweight mapping table
| Step | Owner | Input/system | Action or decision | Wait/rework | Output |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Role or system | Required information | What happens | Delay or repeat | What moves next |
Separate working time from waiting time. A five-minute approval that waits three days is mainly a flow problem.
Map evidence, not the official story
Written procedures often omit workarounds, side messages and exceptions. Ask where people copy information, chase status, correct mistakes or wait for access.
Use the completed map to find bottlenecks, not to justify a tool already selected.
Apply the idea to one real workflow
Choose one current workflow. Record the present outcome, the proposed change, the accountable owner, the most important exception or failure, and one before-and-after measure. Test the smallest safe version before expanding it.
Sources & further reading
- Map and understand a user's whole problem
GOV.UK Service Manual. Public-service guidance on mapping journeys, collaborating across boundaries and locating pain points. The module adapts the method to business workflows.
- Learning about users and their needs
GOV.UK Service Manual. Public-service design guidance linking user needs to stories, acceptance criteria and continued research. Its process should be adapted to the product and risk context.
Examples and exercises are illustrative unless attributed to a source. No independent expert review is claimed.
A correction, a counterexample or an experience worth sharing?
Join the conversation ↗