Scope & preparation
When this is useful
Automation is useful for recurring tasks with reasonably clear rules: moving approved information, generating a routine output or notifying the next owner. It is less suitable when the process itself is unsettled. Automating a confusing workflow can simply make errors move faster.
How ADPR can help
ADPR can help map the workflow, identify a useful automation boundary and implement agreed integrations. Exceptions, duplicate events and failed requests need an explicit handling plan. People should be able to see what ran and take over when a decision requires judgement.
A typical process
Map the current trigger, inputs, owners and exceptions.
Implement a bounded workflow with validation and logging.
Test repeats and failures, then document manual recovery.
What to prepare
- A real example of the repeated task
- Tools involved and access requirements
- Known exceptions and approval rules
Possible scope outputs
- Workflow map
- Automation implementation
- Monitoring and manual-recovery guide
The proposal will confirm what is included, who is responsible and the applicable timeline. These are scope examples, not a fixed package.
Questions worth asking
Should every step be automated?
No. Keep human review where judgement, sensitive decisions or unusual cases require it.
What happens if a connected service fails?
The design should define retries, alerts and a manual fallback. Those behaviours need to be tested as part of the scope.