Map Readiness and Repair Conditions

What you will complete

Complete a Decision Profile for each shortlisted workflow with inputs, systems, handoffs, decisions, exceptions, data, and evidence gaps.

Portfolio rule: If the team cannot explain the current process, the next portfolio action is discovery or repair, not a faster build.

Map one recent case

Follow a real sanitized example from trigger to outcome. Record the inputs, systems, actions, waits, handoffs, decisions, exceptions, and evidence left behind. Policies describe intended work; recent cases reveal side spreadsheets, inboxes, informal approvals, and unowned queues.

Separate process readiness from technical possibility

A technically possible integration may still be a poor portfolio choice when the workflow changes weekly, data is inaccessible, exceptions dominate, volume is low, or nobody owns the outcome. Conversely, a valuable process can remain in discovery while the team repairs data or agrees on policy.

Choose the next evidence-producing action

Use investigate when a material fact is unknown, repair when the operating process itself is inconsistent, defer when a dependency or capacity limit controls timing, and stop when the problem or expected value no longer justifies work. These are valid portfolio decisions.

Worked example: Harbourline Business Services

Fictional teaching example: Harbourline maps invoice intake and discovers three document formats, an unrecorded approval in chat, and inconsistent vendor identifiers. The workflow remains valuable, but it moves to process and data repair before build. The unowned chatbot still lacks a named customer problem and moves to pause. No negative result is hidden to protect sunk effort.

Harbourline is not a Flowgrammer client. Its people, projects, weights, scores, costs, metrics, and outcomes are fictional learner inputs. Replace them with evidence from your organization and retain the evidence source beside each decision.

Workbook exercise

Complete section 2 of the 90-Day AI Automation Portfolio Workbook.

1. Map one recent case for every shortlisted opportunity.
2. Record required data, access, rules, exceptions, and decision rights.
3. List evidence gaps and unstable process steps.
4. Assign investigate, repair, defer, stop, or ready-for-scoring as the next action.

Ask the affected owner to challenge one assumption. Record the original entry, revision reason, decision owner, and review date rather than silently replacing the history.

Common failure modes

• Mapping the ideal process instead of a real case.
• Treating available software as readiness proof.
• Ignoring exceptions because they complicate scoring.
• Calling missing evidence a failed business case.

A portfolio should expose weak evidence and constrained capacity. Repair the responsible layer instead of increasing the score or compressing the schedule.

Capstone connection

Complete a Decision Profile for each shortlisted workflow with inputs, systems, handoffs, decisions, exceptions, data, and evidence gaps. The section must be specific enough for leadership, affected operators, and an implementation reviewer to inspect. It remains planning evidence rather than proof of implementation or outcome.

Check your application