Before we build, we think. Processes aren’t simply digitalised – they’re rethought, with honest analysis and a feasible roadmap.
Digitalisation rarely fails because of technology. It fails because a tool is bought before anyone has written down the process it is meant to improve. A digitalised bad process is afterwards a faster bad process – and a more expensive one, because it now sits inside software. On top of that, in companies that have grown over time, often nobody holds the full map any more: which systems exist, which data is held twice and where, which interface was built years ago by someone who has since left. Decisions about larger investments are then made on gut feeling, because the basis is missing.
We record the current state on site – with the people who run the process every day, not just with the management team. Out of that comes a process map with the systems, handovers and bottlenecks that actually exist, not the ones in the org chart. In the second step the process is rethought rather than rebuilt: what falls away, what belongs together, what has to stay because it is required legally or professionally. The result is a target architecture and a roadmap in which every step carries effort, benefit and sequence – so that you decide with figures rather than on suspicion. If it turns out that a project doesn't pay off, that goes into the roadmap just the same. We do not depend on selling you a project.
An inventory of processes, systems and interfaces as they run today, with a named list of the points where work is left standing. For some companies that alone is the result: it is the first time the map has been complete on a single sheet.
What the system landscape should look like, which step comes first and roughly what it will cost. Prioritised by benefit per effort, not by technical elegance – so that the first project is one whose effect shows quickly.
A quotation for a new system is on the table and the decision is due. We check whether the project addresses the bottleneck that actually hurts, and whether the planned route fits the systems already in place. Sometimes the answer is that a smaller solution will do.
Yes. Analysis and implementation are separate steps, and the roadmap is yours – even if you go on to build with someone else, or not at all. That separation matters to us, because an analysis is worthless if its outcome is fixed in advance. Whoever writes the recommendation and wants to sell the project too rarely recommends leaving it alone.
Four things: a current-state process map with the systems and handovers, a list of the bottlenecks, a target architecture, and a roadmap with effort, benefit and sequence per step. This is deliberately not a slide deck but material you can work with – including with a service provider who isn't us. How long the survey takes depends on the number of departments and systems involved; we estimate that up front.