Scope
Use it on one administrative process.
Good candidates may include email or document intake, information extraction, request classification, routing, checklist preparation, comparisons, drafts, or internal handoffs.
It is not a validated industry standard, risk score, security review, compliance assessment, legal opinion, E&O assessment, or approval to automate.
Write the workflow name
How to mark each gate
- Stop: The workflow cannot move forward safely or usefully in its current form.
- Needs work: A plausible path exists, but the named gap needs an owner and a resolution.
- Ready for detailed review: The answer is specific enough to verify during assessment.
Nine gates
Mark what is true now.
Is there enough business value to justify assessment?
Stop: The agency cannot describe the volume, handling time, rework, error impact, or practical burden. Needs work: The burden is clear but not measured. Ready: A current baseline and the cost of a wrong output are documented.
Status: □ Stop □ Needs work □ Ready
Does the work repeat often enough to study?
Stop: Rare or different every time. Needs work: Parts repeat, but exceptions dominate. Ready: The same basic steps and handoffs happen regularly.
Status: □ Stop □ Needs work □ Ready
Can the current process be shown with examples?
Stop: It lives mainly in memory. Needs work: Instructions and examples exist but conflict. Ready: Procedures, sample inputs, expected outputs, and common exceptions are available.
Status: □ Stop □ Needs work □ Ready
Are the source systems and records known?
Stop: Staff disagree about where information comes from. Needs work: Sources are known, but access or record quality varies. Ready: Approved inboxes, files, systems, records, and procedures are identified.
Status: □ Stop □ Needs work □ Ready
Can permissions be limited?
Stop: The process requires broad, undefined access. Needs work: Access can probably be narrowed, but details are open. Ready: The agency can state what the system may read, retain, write, and never access.
Status: □ Stop □ Needs work □ Ready
Are permitted actions bounded and reversible?
Stop: The system would make open-ended decisions or take hard-to-reverse actions. Needs work: Some actions are bounded, but checkpoints are incomplete. Ready: Allowed and prohibited actions are explicit; each action is reversible or held for approval before external effect.
Status: □ Stop □ Needs work □ Ready
Can a process expert review early outputs?
Stop: No one can own review and corrections. Needs work: A reviewer exists but lacks time or authority. Ready: A named employee can compare results, record corrections, and approve changes.
Status: □ Stop □ Needs work □ Ready
Can success and failure be recognized?
Stop: A correct result cannot be stated. Needs work: Quality is judged informally or only after downstream problems. Ready: Acceptable output, failure modes, and stop conditions are defined.
Status: □ Stop □ Needs work □ Ready
Is the first release small enough to control?
Stop: The proposal spans departments, many systems, or broad access. Needs work: Scope can shrink, but the first boundary is unsettled. Ready: One workflow, a small set of systems, and explicit human checkpoints define the first release.
Status: □ Stop □ Needs work □ Ready
Interpretation
Use gates, not a total.
A Stop on business value, permissions, reversibility, human review, recognizable failure, or first-release scope blocks progression regardless of the other answers.
Needs work means the gap needs a named owner and a resolution before implementation. Ready for detailed review means only that the workflow can be mapped and tested; it is not approval to build.
Stop conditions
Do not treat the workflow as ready if:
- The first release would let AI make coverage decisions or replace licensed staff judgment.
- No employee can own review, corrections, and approval.
- Required access cannot be limited or explained.
- The system would take consequential action without a defined checkpoint or handoff.
- The process depends on conflicting procedures the agency has not resolved.
- The business case depends on role-specific employee profiles that have not been implemented.
Assessment packet
Prepare a small, safe example set.
Do not email or upload live client, policy, claim, or employee records for the first call. Use synthetic examples by default. Agree on a secure transfer method, access limits, retention, and deletion before sharing sensitive material.
- The current procedure, even if it is incomplete.
- Several synthetic sample inputs and expected outputs.
- The systems and records the process touches.
- Common exceptions and failure points.
- The employee who can review results.
- The action the system must never take.
Questions
How to use the result
Does a full set of Ready marks approve automation?
No. It only suggests the workflow may be ready for a detailed assessment. Integration limits, permissions, hardware, testing, and agency approval come later.
Should we score several workflows together?
No. Score each process separately. A clear intake-and-routing workflow may be ready even when a broader service process is not.
What should we avoid as a first workflow?
Avoid broad access, unclear decisions, many departments, consequential actions, or work with no reliable reviewer.
Does this evaluate security or compliance?
No. The agency must separately review legal, regulatory, contractual, privacy, security, and E&O requirements with the appropriate qualified parties.