UW-IT Service Workflow Design
Implemented a new system using Microsoft Power-automate and eliminated single-person workflow dependency
Summer Internship Project at UW-IT
Contributions
Increased a service flow efficiency by 75%, implemented a new system using Microsoft Flow and eliminated single-person workflow dependency
Timeline
3 months
Jun 2022 - Sep 2023
Teammates
1× UX Designer
My Role
• Research
• UX
Background
Problem
The current PDF Remediation Service Flow is too arduous, manual and heavily dependent on one person:
Gaby, Accessibility Specialist.
Deliverables
Gained a detailed understanding of the current service flow to determine pain points, frustrations, and areas of improvement.
Refined the current service flow with a focus on increasing organization, efficiency, and collaboration
Design Process
1. Identify Pain Points:
To understand the current process of the PDF remediation workflow, we created a workflow chart, specifying the different decisions and communication involved.
2. Define information needs
To create an simplified workflow (an MVP solution that’s practical and implementable), we started by outlining general flows to ideate
We documented the necessary information whenever something felt too abstract, since this stage was focused on defining the new flow rather than detailing solutions.
Decisions and stakeholders involved in the current remediation workflow
Creating this workflow helped us understand where in the workflow there are multiple required decisions for one individual, and where progress is often halted. We reviewed this workflow with different stakeholders to revise the workflow and to determine current problems and frustrations.
Original Process and Issues
There are 4 stages in the service flow:
Requesting
UW Departments request for documents to remediated by the ATS team, which is managed by Gaby.
-
Disorganized: requests come in through four channels
Cluttered: All requests flood Gaby’s inbox
Gaby- dependent: Communication with clients fully relies on Gaby
Routing
Gaby sends requests to students and a third-party remediation service, depending on availability and difficulty of the requests.
-
Gaby-dependent: Fully dependent on Gaby
Manual Process: Gaby does all decision-making and manually routes documents
Disorganized: documents are placed in emails and other software
Quality Control
Gaby inspects all documents for errors, to ensure all documents meet the clients’ requests.
-
Gaby- dependent: Fully dependent on Gaby
Tracking
Gaby manually archives and tracks documents for internal reports.
-
Gaby-dependent: Fully dependent on Gaby
Disorganized: progress tracked across different platforms
Annotating all the necessary information for each decision/action helped solution development
3. Brainstorm solutions
Below are the possible solutions we identified to improve each stage of the workflow.
As UW-IT transitioned from Slack to Microsoft Teams for all communication, we started to explore Microsoft products and identified Planner and Power Automate as possible solutions.
Requesting
Ticket System in Microsoft Planner to optimize organization
Routing
Shared NetID to handle client communication
Quality Control
Students can upload accessibility reports to a ticket on Microsoft Teams Planner
Tracking
The new tracker automatically updates rows and numbers from form submissions, replacing manual input in the Google Sheet
4. Final Report
After brainstorming, we wrote up a proposal with several solutions and our design recommendations to present the solutions to Gaby.
Our recommended solution was to use the following Ticket System:
An automated workflow, using the Microsoft tools Planner, Sharepoint list, One Drive, and Forms.
Ticket System in Microsoft Planner to optimize organization
5. Implementation (Phase 1
To slowly transition from the old workflow to the proposed workflow, we decided to implement incremental changes.
In Phase 1, Gaby is using the workspace to assign tasks, but students are not yet contacting clients directly. We created an Instruction Guide to help Gaby and students understand the steps of the new phase.
Instruction Guide with instructions for each step of the workflow
User Testing
We used the Instruction Guide to determine the usability of the proposed workflow. We asked 3 students and Gaby to go through the workflow. Here are the iterations we made for phase 1 based on the test results:
Problem:
Students missed steps from the instruction guide
Solution:
Automated checklist in each ticket, created by a client submission
Problem:
Attachments in each ticket were confusing because the full document names weren't visible, requiring users to click and preview to identify them.
Solution:
Automated link in each ticket that leads to page with corresponding details
Problem:
Unclear how to assign multiple people to work on the same ticket
Solution:
Previous File Folder Solution allowed assigning people for each document without having to split the ticket
Problem:
People found it difficult to navigate to another interface for tracking
Solution:
Automate a link to be created in each ticket that links to an automatically created unique file folder for the client request, where multiple files can be uploaded.
Result
Since its launch in September, the Phase 1 workflow has been live and running smoothly. We've made a few adjustments and troubleshooting along the way, but the entire team is actively using it, and the feedback has been overwhelmingly positive. Tickets are coming in daily, and here’s a glimpse of our current planner layout.
Impact
81%
Ease of use
75%
Improved flow efficiency
“I like how visualized it looks! I’m excited to work directly with Clients”
- Student A
“This exceeds my expectations! It really makes my life easier. I can finally go on vacation stress-free!”
-Gaby
Reflections
Scope kept changing
Originally, I was asked to design the workflow for ServiceNow, but later told we weren't considering it anymore, and I had to come up with a short-term solution that would be easy for the team to adopt. It was frustrating at first because I didn't think I could design something effective without a powerful tool like ServiceNow. Then, two weeks later, my design manager said we might still use ServiceNow after all. The shifting scope messed with my workflow, but by trusting the design process, I ended up creating a simple solution that I’m proud of.Trust the process
I spent a month detailing every aspect of the workflow chart and another two weeks creating new ones for ideation. The process was tedious and abstract, and I often questioned whether it was perfect or necessary. However, all of this groundwork proved invaluable when we reached the solution phase. All the little details and the familiarity I gained with the process actually made shaping the solution the easier part.