What a process map shows—and what it can miss
A process map represents the activities that turn a request into an outcome: who takes part, in what order, using which tools, decisions and timescales. Flowcharts, BPMN diagrams and swimlanes offer different ways to show this. The quality of the evidence matters more than the drawing format.
There are two possible maps of the same process. One describes the prescribed workflow: procedures, instructions and system settings. A workshop with managers can capture it quickly. The other describes what an order, case or complaint actually passes through on an ordinary working day: repeated data entry, informal approvals by email, separate spreadsheets and detours through the person who knows how to resolve a problem. Comparing these maps helps explain performance.
Procedures cannot describe every situation
A gap between prescribed and actual work does not automatically mean the organisation is failing. Research in ergonomics, including Guérin and colleagues’ Comprendre le travail pour le transformer, examines how people continually adapt to the material and organisational conditions of work. An incomplete customer request, a system failure or an absent colleague requires judgement the procedure may not anticipate. People fill those gaps to keep the process working.
Process mining addresses part of the same problem by reconstructing workflows from system records. Its usefulness is a reminder that a documented process and an observed process provide different kinds of evidence. A workshop may describe the intended workflow; understanding what happens in practice requires investigation.
A five-step method
1. Start with a decision question. ‘Map all our processes’ is too broad to guide useful work. Ask why quotations take eleven days, or where customer information gets lost between sales and invoicing. The question determines scope, detail and when the investigation has enough evidence.
2. Collect the formal process. Gather procedures, instructions, system settings and role descriptions. Draw the official version without correcting it. It is the reference for comparison.
3. Listen to the people doing the work. Speak individually with people at each step, including those outside management. Observe concrete cases from start to finish. Follow the case through the organisation. Explain confidentiality and invite everyone in scope to contribute; participation and candour matter more than sophisticated diagramming software.
4. Compare the two maps. Record repeated entries, loops, queues, duplicate approvals, skipped steps and unofficial routes. Estimate the frequency and time cost of each gap. This evidence is the main result; the diagram makes it easier to understand.
5. Decide what each gap means. Some deviations need to be corrected. Others reveal better practices that should be incorporated into the formal process. Record the decision, its owner and the intended result. A map becomes useful when it changes how the work is organised.
Organisation and assessments
Make organisational decisions with a clear assessment
Our assessments identify practical changes to help your teams and processes work together.
Read workarounds as evidence
An unofficial spreadsheet alongside the CRM can reveal needs the system does not meet. An approval obtained by email may show a route people use when the formal one is too slow. Investigate the reasons before deciding whether to remove the workaround. Some protect the flow of work; others create risks that need addressing.
In urban planning, informal paths across grass are sometimes called desire lines: they show where people actually need to go. Organisations have equivalents. A structured channel for employee suggestions can bring them into view. The AT&T case discussed by Jeremy Legg in MIT Sloan Management Review illustrates how employee complaints about outdated rules and tools can become material for improvement.
Information collected only through management can miss these details. As accounts move through organisational levels, they are summarised and filtered. Compare the reported picture with accounts from the people closest to the work.
From mapping to process assessment
A map describes the workflow and its gaps. An assessment goes further: it estimates their cost, investigates causes, checks requirements and prioritises changes. Starting with a reliable map allows the assessment to concentrate on the most important areas. If several processes reveal the same problems across departments, the underlying issue may be organisational.
Tools capture different parts of the picture
A familiar diagramming tool or a photographed whiteboard may be sufficient. BPMN adds precision where teams understand it; elsewhere, a simpler notation may be clearer. Collecting reliable evidence usually takes more effort than drawing the finished map.
Process mining reconstructs flows from digital records. It can reveal recurring patterns at scale, within the limits of what systems capture. Calls, informal discussions and local files may remain invisible. Interviews and observation help explain those gaps.
Test the map with the people doing the work. If they recognise both the normal route and the awkward detours, you have evidence for decisions. If they see only the official theory, the investigation needs to continue.
Frequently asked questions
How does process mapping differ from a flowchart?
How does process mapping differ from a flowchart?
A flowchart is a visual format. Process mapping is the wider investigation: define the question, collect evidence, compare the intended and actual workflow, and decide what to change. A flowchart can present the findings; it cannot replace that work.
How long does process mapping take?
How long does process mapping take?
The drawing may take a few hours. Collecting evidence takes most of the time: from several days to several weeks, depending on scope and the method used. A map completed in one meeting is more likely to describe the intended process than its full range of everyday variations.
Who should take part in process mapping?
Who should take part in process mapping?
Include the people carrying out each step as well as their managers. Both have useful perspectives. Collect individual accounts separately before comparing them, so the formal view does not crowd out practical detail.
How does process mapping differ from process mining?
How does process mapping differ from process mining?
Process mining reconstructs workflows from system logs and is particularly useful where activities leave consistent digital records. Interviews and observation also capture judgement, workarounds and informal routes. The approaches complement each other: people can often explain the patterns found in the data.
Sources
Guérin F., Laville A., Daniellou F., Duraffourg J., Kerguelen A., Comprendre le travail pour le transformer. La pratique de l’ergonomie, Anact / Octarès. French-language reference on prescribed and actual work.
Legg J., ‘How AT&T Employees Turned Process Gripes Into $230 Million Saved’, MIT Sloan Management Review, 2024, reprint 65404. MIT Sloan Management Review.
