Which workflow should you automate first?
Use a four-question scorecard to choose your first workflow automation and see how it applies to purchase approvals.
Start with a recurring workflow that takes time or causes delays, has a clear owner, and follows a predictable path. Pick one step you can test end to end. In a purchase approval workflow, that might mean getting requests to the right reviewer and sending reminders when they sit too long.
Check whether the workflow is ready
Walk through a recent batch of requests with the person who owns the process. Agree on the usual steps, where the required information comes from, and who will handle unusual requests or failures. Set up a manual fallback before the pilot. If the team disagrees on who approves a request or what a complete request looks like, resolve that first. Keep a person responsible for decisions that require judgment.
Scorecard for choosing your first automation
Score each question from 0 to 2. Add questions 1 and 2 for benefit (out of 4). Add questions 3 and 4 for readiness (out of 4). Use the same scale for every workflow you compare.
- How much staff time does the step take each week?0 for under 30 minutes, 1 for 30 minutes to under two hours, and 2 for two hours or more. Count hands-on time and record waiting time separately.
- How often does the step cause rework or delays?0 for less than monthly, 1 for at least monthly but less than weekly, and 2 for weekly or more. Count problems like missing information, misrouted requests, or a handoff nobody picked up.
- How predictable is the normal path?0 if the team disagrees on the rules, 1 if the usual path is clear and a noticeable share of requests still need manual routing, and 2 if stable rules cover nearly every request.
- How reliable are the inputs?0 if key details are often missing, 1 if they are available but often need cleanup, and 2 if required fields are captured consistently in a known place.
Among workflows with a named owner, a manual fallback, and a readiness score of at least 3, start with the one that has the highest benefit. If none meet those conditions, fix the lowest-scoring readiness item and score again. If two candidates are close, pick the one you can test with fewer teams and roll back easily. Use the scores to compare candidates, then measure actual savings during the pilot.
Example of routing purchase approvals from a shared inbox
Say your team gets 30 requests a week through a form that emails a shared inbox. Staff spend about four minutes per request logging it, forwarding it, or chasing an update. That’s 30 × 4 minutes = two hours of hands-on time per week. At least one request needs rework or follow-up every week. The form reliably captures department and amount. In the latest batch, 26 of 30 requests followed the standard routing rules. Four needed manual routing because the reviewer was unavailable or the request crossed departments.
The workflow scores 4 out of 4 for benefit (time 2, rework 2) and 3 out of 4 for readiness (rules 1, inputs 2). Start by logging requests, routing them to reviewers, and sending overdue reminders. Send exceptions and failed handoffs to a named person who can take over. The reviewer still makes the approval decision.
Pilot with one team. Compare staff handling time, time awaiting a decision, and missed handoffs with the previous batch. Check that every exception reached its owner before expanding the rollout.