Illustrative conveyor belts carrying packages through a large industrial facility at dusk.

Business practice efficiency · Executive worksheet

Workflow baseline worksheet

Make one workflow visible. Separate active work, waiting and repeat work, then choose a practical experiment to improve the next handoff.

A practical Assuras resource / No email required

Make the work visible

Start with one item. Follow it all the way through.

A process can feel busy while an individual request spends most of its time waiting. This worksheet makes that distinction visible before you decide what to change.

Choose a narrow boundary

Follow one request, order, approval or service case from a clearly defined starting event to a clearly defined ending event. Choose a case that represents a recurring problem. Record unusual conditions rather than treating the case as an average.

Use one clock

Record minutes consistently. Calendar time includes nights and weekends; working time counts only your defined operating hours. Keep original processing, waiting and repeat work separate. Record a wait against the stage it precedes, once.

What this measures: the recorded sequence for one item. It does not establish average cycle time, financial savings or labor capacity. Parallel stages need a separate timeline; adding overlapping durations would overstate elapsed time.

Illustrative example

A small approval is waiting for a large window.

In this invented example, a complete order request waits for a daily approval window. The times demonstrate the worksheet; they are not Assuras client results or an industry benchmark.

One order approval, measured in calendar minutes
StageOriginal workWaiting before stageRepeat work
Validate request10 min0 min0 min
Check credit terms15 min120 min10 min
Approve exception5 min1,440 min0 min
Communicate decision8 min30 min0 min

The sequence contains 48 minutes of work and repeat work and 1,590 minutes of waiting: 27 hours and 18 minutes in total. The largest recorded wait precedes exception approval. That is a place to investigate, not proof that the approver is the cause.

A useful next experiment: test an earlier exception-review window for a small set of comparable requests. Compare waiting time, returned requests and decision quality. Keep a named owner and a stop condition if the change introduces risk.

Your working baseline

Record the sequence you can support.

Use up to four stages. Combine only consecutive activities that share an owner and a clear handoff. Leave an unused stage completely blank. The worksheet starts empty; use the illustrative example button to explore it.

Entries stay in this open page. Nothing is submitted or saved automatically. Copy or download your record before closing.

1. Define the boundary

All durations are minutes. Original work excludes repeat work. Waiting contains no active processing. Enter 0 for a known zero; leave unknown durations blank. Record sequential, non-overlapping periods. A blank duration stays unknown and is never silently treated as zero.

2. Stage one
3. Stage two
4. Stage three
5. Stage four
6. Choose the next experiment

Your recorded sequence

A baseline for the next conversation

Add a stage to begin. Unknown times will remain unknown.

Original processing—
Waiting—
Repeat work—
Recorded time—

The worksheet will identify the largest recorded wait and any gaps in the timing record. It does not assign a performance grade.

    Durations are additive only for consecutive, non-overlapping periods within the boundary you defined. Work minutes are elapsed processing time for the item, not person-hours. More than one person may be involved. A single case is a starting observation, not an estimate of typical performance.

    Turn observation into a decision

    Investigate the handoff before redesigning the process.

    Review the record with the people who do and receive the work. Reconcile missing timestamps, distinguish necessary checks from avoidable waiting, and test one change on comparable cases.

    If the largest delay is waiting

    Inspect the queue, release rules, decision availability and information required at the handoff. The longest wait may sit downstream of the real constraint.

    If the largest issue is repeat work

    Examine what a complete request looks like, where acceptance criteria are unclear, and who can resolve an exception. Faster repetition is not the same as a better outcome.

    If several improvements compete for the same people, use the initiative-capacity comparison. If a technology change is proposed, define the work it must support in the software evaluation worksheet before considering features.

    Keep the working record

    Take it into the conversation.

    Your branded PDF includes the entries, working assumptions and current result, ready to share or print. Use it to agree an owner and the evidence needed for the next decision.

    From the worksheet to the work

    Find the constraint worth working on.

    Bring one workflow and the evidence you have. A focused review can help clarify the boundary, surface unresolved handoffs and define a practical improvement experiment.

    Explore business practice efficiency

    Discuss a focused workflow review