Operating Workflow system, jobs come in through workflow one after another. From your supervisor or Web form, or registered on the clock. Workers give them priority then deal with them untiringly.
But now, how do you deal with jobs that don't know how to be handled. it occurs often... However, we hesitate to thrust jobs into the flow by email or oral.

The following Workflow model is very simplified "All-purpose Request Flow". And it's also convenient to experience Workflow system. It helps to request 1 on 1. Specifically, in those situations.

  • [Execution Request] Please review on document A.
  • [Execution Request] Please answer to Mr.C about subject B.
  • [Consideration Request] I think it's time to execute idea D. Please give a consideration on it.
  • [Consideration Request] We should correct an expression on the web site as "AAA". Please consider on it.
Tru ly, this Workflow model is very important to the theme of "Discovering undefined Workflow". Just because it is undefined, we apt to tell requests by email or oral. Eventually, there will be no record of the job. "No sight, no improvement"
And you find a job often comes on the record of "All-purpose Request", you should start defining it as a workflow.

1. Request, 2. Action, 3. Confirmation

[All-purpose Request: "3. Confirmation" screen]

Even gained the support of machine translation, human "translation" is necessary to some extent.

Translation does not end when translated meaning of a sentence, it also requires various "conversion process", such as change URL of web site in each language, or alteration on web purchase process for region and countries. (Manuals, Press release, FAQ, blog, fault information etc.)
For a global company, translators who understand circumstances throughout the company are indispensable. So we want to visualize "work" and "flow of work" for an employee in childcare or a retiree can join as "a telecommuter"

1. Translation Request, 2. Review, 3. Questions, 3de. Translate into de, 3fr. Translate into fr, 3es. Translate into en, 3.ja. Translate into ja, 4zh. Translate into zh, 4ko. Translate into ko, 5.Confirmation

"Cooperation of other divisions" is essential to handle complaints.

Even how sincere contact person heard and understood what Claimant thought and felt, it does not make sense if end up there.
It must be connected to,
  • Improve product quality (defective, missing, delayed delivery)
  • Improve services (denial of service, lower service levels)
  • Improve employee support (telephone calls, e-mail text)
in practice. There will be some complaint almost false accusation, of course. But before judging "to ignore them", there should be "appropriate steps". To establish procedures for their products first, and then to review its operating procedures, we want to apply the concept of BPM to handle complaint.

In the following Workflow model, employee who takes a complaint inputs the claim as it is at Task [1. Input Complaint]. And then designate who (all employees including the president, etc.) is responsible to it, but if no one can be designated, it goes to Customer Service Dep.
Should time and circumstances permit, we want to consider "complaints flow on Twitter or Facebook" found by chance as the target to handle.

1. Input Complaint, 2. Designation, 3. Answer, 3b. Review

* Publish weekly since 6th of June for better quality!
* As the first of weekly issue, introducing <How to integrate Google Spreadsheets with QBPMS>Today

We offer Workflow Template for a variety of Business Category in "Workflow-Sample.net". Analyzing on the number of repeaters and duration of visits for each article, we see which category of business or business task draws attention. (Speaking of the recent developments in the Japanese version is "Telecommuting")

Among those categories, "Handling Complaints" gathers attention all the time. I guess all sorts of companies seek how they should build handling flow as well as how to contact with customers.
In particular,
  • When to share information with Supervisors and executives ?
  •  By whom and how the handling be checked ?
would be difficult.

The following is a Workflow model assumed that handling complaint is the most important mission of the Director of Customer Service. All the answering sentence to the complaint will be sent after review (or modified) by the Director of Customer Service.

1. Input Complaint, 2. Creating a primary answer, 3. The primary answer sentence review, 4. Creating a secondary answer, 5. Secondary answer sentence review

[Handle Complaints: "3. The primary answer sentence review" screen]

Everyone will try to build "Between Companies (cross-) Workflow", and visualize them.
Want to visualize,
  • Delivery process
  • Inspection process
  • The Payment
  • Confirmation of the Payment
However, using Cross-enterprise Workflow makes it visible even such as " whether the business partner has completed payment verification process". But think well, there is nothing trouble in any way.

  • "Think Supply Chain As Cross-Enterprise Workflow"
  • "Sending Workflow Logs to Gmail Makes Referring Easier"
1. Quote Request, 1b. Approval Request, 2. Arrangement, 3. Create Quote, 4. Approval quotes, 5. Ordering the contents of quotations, 6. Correction, 7. Approve Modifications, 8. Order Confirmation, 9. Delivery Completion Report, 10. Payment Confirmation

[Quote-Reception-Delivery Process: "1b. Approval Request" screen]

In the article "Think Supply Chain As "Cross-Enterprise Workflow"", only the accepting side has assumed "Supervisor approval (leader approval)". Assuming them in the order side Workflow model will be like one below.

1. Quote Request, 1b. Approval Request, 2. Arrangement, 3. Create Quote, 4. Approval quotes, 5. Ordering the contents of quotations, 6. Correction, 7. Approve Modifications, 8. Order Confirmation
[Quote Process<Supervisor approval>: [1b. Approval request] screen]

More of Business Process Management (BPM) activities are to manage and to promote improvement procedures (workflow) of internal company.
However, working on reviewing procedures this and that in practice, you will find more worth working on Inter-company workflow than internal company. The main reason is as follows.

  • Easier: roles of Companies are clear
  • Wasteful in communication: allow time for document (mail / FAX / mail) interaction
  • Wasteful in saving data: each company has different ways of data managing
  • Careful in improvement: to carry out improvement over tension that not to annoy people outside the company.
 *(Of course, it's so hard to reach consensus between companies)
    Even a Email is legally "a document" nowadays. It can be an evidence in the court as well. So "Paper Documents" should be reduced even little by little.

    The following workflow model focuses on digitalizing entire paper documents between companies with many transactions such as "Quotes + Orders Confirmations". In another word, exclusive ordering system for client. (SCM)

    1. Quote Request, 2. Arrangement, 3. Create Quote, 4. Approval quotes, 5. Ordering the contents of quotations, 6. Correction, 7. Approve Modifications, 8. Order Confirmation

    [Quote Process: [3. Create Quote] screen]
    Want to test Web Form for the customer if it works properly, is often the case.
    In that case, it may become uncomfortable situation if the workflow was too automated.
    It costs much when "Free Trial" was actually mailed to the address which development stuff entered for testing.

    Expand "Making Customer List That Tells You How Good, Out From "Free Trial" to split the flow for "Test". In the following workflow model, automatic processing of publishing accounts is not performed when when you input [Applicant Name] started string of "test"


    0. Test Check, 1. Application Info, 2. Manual Issue Account, 3. Verification, 4. Lead Info, 5. Sales Phone Result

    [Trial Account Issue-Automatic Issue:[0. Test Check] screen]

    • Title<<Company Name>>
    -Applicant Info-
    • Name(string)
    • Company(string)
    • Email Address(string)
    • Phone Number(string)
    • Other Info(string: text box 3lines)
    • Ignore?(select:yes/no)
    • Expectation(select:Expected/Ignore)
    • Issued Account(string)
    • Expectation Mark(1-10)(numeric)
    • Correspondent(discussion)

    When the condition of "[Applicant Name] is started with string of [test]" is true, it flows into the Task [0. Test Check] and account issue is not processed. If you want to test [Account Issue Process] or [Complete Notification], it can be considered like the following Workflow model to split at [3. Verification]. (It seems like no different from selecting [Ignore] at [Expectation], but can be recorded explicitly test input.)

    0. Test Check, 1. Application Info, 2. Manual Issue Account, 3. Verification, 4. Lead Info, 5. Sales Phone Result

    Inviting for Free Samples and Trials, and sending out automatically to customers.
    It is good to satisfy expecting customers with those automation through from reception to sending.
    But is it enough? We want connect them to more push into customer.
    Workflow below passes application info to the sales.

    • "Automate From Acceptance To Issue On Trial Account"
    • "Free Trial Account" Issuance Automated And Unmanned"

    1. Application Info, 2. Manual Issue Account, 3. Verification, 4. Lead Info

    [Trial Account Issue-Automatic Issue: [2. Manual Issue Account] screen]