The real path is invisible
A process diagram cannot show every variation and waiting period in actual execution.
THE BUSINESS CHALLENGE
Where work starts to break down.
Debate replaces diagnosis
Teams rely on isolated complaints and interviews without a comparable view of operational evidence.
Improvement ends with the project
A redesign is released without a repeatable way to check results or detect a return to previous behavior.
HOW IT WORKS
A practical path from problem to process.
People own decisions. Systems carry out configured actions. Any AI assistance must use authorized context and produce work for review.
-
01
Data owner
Prepare the evidence
Agree case identifiers, activity names, timestamps and the scope of the event data. Resolve missing or inconsistent records.
-
02
Analyst
Discover actual paths
Use BPI to reconstruct process variants and examine waiting, rework and deviations.
-
03
Process owner
Compare with intent
Compare execution with the approved EBPA model and investigate why differences occur.
-
04
Delivery team
Implement an approved change
Revise a rule, responsibility or BPA workflow after the owner confirms the proposed intervention.
-
05
Analyst and owner
Verify the result
Compare like-for-like periods and populations, and monitor the process after release.
The platform behind the solution.
Scope the capabilities around the process. The solution is not a separate product line.
Process Mining Platform
BPI supports process discovery, bottleneck analysis, conformance checks and ongoing monitoring.
Explore BPI →Process Architecture & Design Platform
EBPA supplies the approved process model and a versioned reference for comparison.
Explore EBPA →Process Automation Platform
BPA provides execution records and a place to implement approved workflow changes.
Explore BPA →Make the handoffs visible.
Business scenario · Procure-to-pay cycle time review
- 01Purchase and invoice events prepared
- 02Payment paths reconstructed
- 03Invoice approval delays investigated
- 04Approval handoff change agreed
- 05Payment cycle times compared
See the work in practice.
Xingfa Aluminium
Materials & manufacturing
From process standards to execution and operational insight.
Xingfa Aluminium introduced process design, automation, integration robots and process intelligence in a staged manufacturing programme.
Read the implementation story ↗
Chambroad group
Energy & chemicals
Connecting shared services across a diversified group.
Chambroad group brought service entry points, business-unit responsibilities and cross-system workflows into a coordinated operating model.
Read the implementation story ↗A FOCUSED START
Agree the scope.
Establish the baseline.
What to bring
Select a question that event data can answer. Confirm permission to use the data, define a stable case identifier and agree a comparison window before analysis.
What to measure
Track waiting time, rework, variants and end-to-end duration with a documented population, period and definition.
Implementation scope and outcomes depend on the process, data, systems and team. Agree success criteria during discovery.
YOUR QUESTIONS
Before you begin.
Can analysis start without event logs?
First assess the available records. Reliable discovery needs identifiable cases, activities and timestamps; a diagram alone cannot reconstruct execution.
Does a deviation prove noncompliance?
No. A difference is an investigation signal. The responsible team must check context, data quality and the applicable rule.
Does the platform automatically fix every bottleneck?
Analysis informs an improvement decision. Owners approve changes and delivery teams implement and validate them.
Start with one process.
Build toward something bigger.
Bring your team, your systems, and the work you want to improve.