Process improvement.

Why processes drift

No one designs a bad process. They accumulate. A workaround introduced during a busy quarter becomes permanent. A check added after one error stays for a decade. A spreadsheet built by someone who has since left becomes the system of record. Each decision was reasonable at the time, and the combined result is a process nobody would design deliberately.

The cost is rarely visible on any report. It shows up as month-end taking longer than it should, as the same data being keyed into three systems, as one person being the only one who knows how something works. Because it accumulated gradually, it reads as normal.

What we actually do

We start by watching the work, not by reading the procedure. The documented process and the real process are almost never the same, and the gap between them is usually where the cost lives. That means conversations with the people doing the job, sample files, and following a single transaction end to end.

From there we map the process as it genuinely runs, including the rework loops and the handoffs that the official version leaves out. We measure what matters: how long each step takes, how often it has to be redone, where work waits. Then we remove what is not earning its place, standardise what remains, and agree how it will be measured going forward.

Only at that point do we ask whether technology has a role. Frequently a redesigned process is enough on its own, and that is a legitimate outcome rather than a failed sale.

Where it applies

Finance and operations are where we do most of this work, because those functions carry the highest volume of repetitive, rules-based activity in a typical SME. Accounts payable, accounts receivable, credit control, month-end close, order processing, quotation and onboarding all share the same characteristics: high volume, defined rules, and enough exceptions that nobody has ever fully written them down.

It also applies wherever a process crosses a boundary. Work that passes between departments, between a business and its suppliers, or between systems that do not talk to each other is where delay and duplication concentrate.

The Lean Six Sigma part

Lean Six Sigma is the discipline underneath the work rather than a badge on the invoice. Lean contributes the focus on flow and on eliminating activity that adds no value. Six Sigma contributes the focus on variation, on the fact that a process producing the right answer most of the time is a process producing the wrong answer some of the time.

What it means in practice is that decisions are made against measurement rather than opinion, and that improvements are designed to hold once we have gone. Barry is a certified Lean Six Sigma Black Belt, alongside PMP and PRINCE2 certification.

What you get

A process map of how the work genuinely runs today, with the measurements behind it. A redesigned process, agreed with the people who have to operate it. A clear statement of what changed and what it is worth. And an honest recommendation on whether automation should follow, including the case for not automating.

A first engagement focused on process optimisation alone typically runs two to four weeks for a defined process.

Signs this is your problem

The symptoms are consistent across businesses that otherwise have nothing in common. Month-end takes longer than anyone will admit. The same figure is entered into more than one system. A process runs correctly only because one particular person is available. Reports are assembled by hand from sources that disagree with each other.

Individually these read as minor irritations. Collectively they are the tax a business pays for processes that were never designed. They also tend to hold up fine under normal load and give way exactly when you win a large contract or lose an experienced person, which is the worst possible timing.