Establishing the current state
Creates a structured account of how a process operates from interviews and documented procedures. It connects activities, roles, systems and decisions into a map suitable for review with the process owner.
— Operations & Process
Turns interview notes, SOPs or transcripts into a structured current-state map with roles, activities, decisions, systems and handoffs, plus the validation questions for the process owner.
2–3 days → ~15 minutes
For a typical multi-document review workflow
No coding required
— USE CASES
Creates a structured account of how a process operates from interviews and documented procedures. It connects activities, roles, systems and decisions into a map suitable for review with the process owner.
Makes ownership and handoff points explicit where work crosses team boundaries. The role/activity matrix provides a shared reference for discussing unclear responsibilities.
Highlights ambiguities and inconsistencies in the source material rather than smoothing them over. Focused validation questions identify what the process owner needs to confirm.
Provides a current-state baseline for improvement discussions, with decision logic and activity-level inputs and outputs. It helps teams ground proposed changes in a shared understanding of existing work.
— HOW IT BEHAVES
The mechanics behind this specific template — what it reads, what it calculates, and where a human stays in the loop.
All of your process documentation and run data is processed as one set, so patterns across documents surface instead of being read one file at a time.
Findings on the end-to-end process are written up as a document that reads like professional output, with each claim tied back to a process step.
Each process step is assessed against explicit criteria you control, so the same standard is applied across the end-to-end process on every run.
Facts and fields are lifted out of process documentation and run data and held in a consistent shape, process step by process step.
Process knowledge often sits across interview accounts, working notes and formal procedures that do not quite agree. In practice it shows up as establishing the current state: creates a structured account of how a process operates from interviews and documented procedures. It connects activities, roles, systems and decisions into a map suitable for review with the process owner. It is the kind of work that decides whether a recommendation survives scrutiny — and the kind that quietly eats 2–3 days of senior time whenever it comes round.
As a Skill, the work is already sequenced. You bring the evidence, and the run produces structured current-state process map plus swimlane narrative showing activities by role. The criteria, ordering and review points that make the answer trustworthy are encoded in the Skill itself — which is the difference between a structured method and a prompt someone pastes in. In effect, 2–3 days of senior time compresses into ~15 minutes — and the output is comparable across clients, quarters and colleagues instead of shaped by whoever ran it.
Process mapping exports as a structured SKILL.md file and is MCP-ready, so the same method runs in ChatGPT, Claude, Copilot or your own AI products. Adapt it to your methodology, and the intelligence stays yours — not locked to one vendor.
Identifies where adoption of a new system, process or way of working stalls after go-live, with an evidence-backed report on barriers, workarounds and differences between functions.
Assesses AI readiness through anonymous staff evidence, identifying where AI can improve day-to-day work and the practical barriers that could prevent those gains.
Maps how an organisation actually operates using anonymous accounts from its people, producing an evidence-backed diagnostic of responsibilities, decisions, handoffs and duplicated effort.
Reads a set of weekly status notes for progress, blockers and RAG, charts the trend, and writes an executive digest focused on trajectory.
Reviews a proposed change against your change policy and returns a governed advisory decision — approve, approve with conditions, defer to the change board or reject — weighing risk, blast radius and rollback, with a change manager sign-off required before anything reaches production.
Assesses a refund or compensation request against the contract terms and refund policy that govern it, then returns a decision on approving it in full, in part, offering a goodwill gesture or declining, with every element of the remedy traced to the clause that allows it and anything beyond an agent's authority routed for review.