Gage Martin

Operations & business systems

Menu

Find where the process breaks

Follow a real workflow through its people and records. Identify exceptions, agree the governing rules and give each finding an owner and a correction path.

A process keeps failing, records disagree or nobody can explain which handoff needs attention.

Discuss a process problem

A useful first result

A documented workflow, a checked exception list and an action plan the responsible people can use.

Start with a recent billing, purchasing, receiving or administrative problem that people can walk through together.

Does this fit the work?

A good fit when

  • Someone can explain the current workflow and provide authorized examples.
  • The team wants findings it can review before changing the process or records.

It needs a different starting point when

  • The expected result is an accusation about a person without a checked sequence of events.
  • Nobody has authority to settle a disputed rule or own the correction.

A starting scope

Fees
Fees follow an agreed scope.
Starting scope

The starting point is the work you need to do. Keep the software that serves it well, and agree any configuration, integration or replacement before making a change.

A review or focused project can stand on its own. Use this outline to discuss the work; the written proposal sets the agreed scope, commercial terms and acceptance checks.

What you provide
  • Recent examples, current procedures and the source records behind them.
  • People who own the handoffs and can confirm the governing rules.
What you receive
  • Findings linked to the records and rules used in the review.
  • A prioritized action plan with owners and acceptance checks.
  • Where agreed, repeatable checks that distinguish a clean result from missing evidence.
Outside this starting scope
  • Automatic correction or deletion of business records.
  • Treating a last-editor field as proof of responsibility.
Access and decisions
  • Record owners authorize the review and its audience.
  • A responsible person approves any later correction separately.
How we check the result
  • The reviewer can reproduce representative findings from their supporting records.
  • A missing source produces an explicit unverified result.
  • Each accepted action has an owner and a way to check the correction.
Your involvement
Workflow owners walk through recent examples and review the findings and proposed actions.
Ownership and handover
Your business keeps the findings, rules and action plan, with correction authority assigned to its own responsible people.
Planning the work
The review boundary and source availability are settled before scheduling the work.
After delivery
Ongoing checks and follow-up improvements use an agreed scope; the initial assessment can stand alone.

Ways to arrange the work

A review you can act on

Follow a defined problem through the people, records and decisions involved. Receive findings, options and a practical next step.

The assessment stands on its own. Your team can carry out the recommendation, or we can scope delivery separately.

A focused project

Deliver a defined change, with agreed inputs, responsibilities, acceptance checks and handover.

Additional sources, features or workflows need a scope decision before work begins.

Care for an agreed system

Maintain a defined installation, investigate findings and keep its operating instructions current.

Coverage and response expectations follow the applicable agreement. Existing care allowances remain in that agreement; this description adds no new allowance.

Planned operational improvement

Work through an agreed backlog of changes and review what happened after people used them.

Capacity, priorities and acceptance are agreed for the work. A recurring arrangement does not include unlimited development.

Related work and its limits