Digitalisation can begin with a clear working rule

Describe the uncertainty before choosing the tool

A team seeks a new project tool because nobody can reliably say which product image has content approval for the shop. Additional status fields help only when it is clear who can decide and which file version the decision concerns.

The GOV.UK Service Manual recommends examining the problem before accepting a predefined solution. Applied to a business, our recommendation is to describe the missing working rule before carrying it into a new interface.

Example: first make the same workflow clearer

The following situation and proposed rules are entirely fictional. The team already has a shared work item with file references and status fields.

The practical check is whether a colleague covering the work can identify which file received content approval, and from whom, without searching private email histories. This makes it possible to plan a small trial workflow. Observe whether questions, conflicting states or extra copies still arise. An agreed rule is not evidence that it works in daily operations.

When additional technology is needed

The existing tool may suffice for a manageable workflow. It may be unsuitable if necessary access rights, traceable changes, larger volumes or integrations are missing. Describe that gap specifically and assess a new tool against it.

The GOV.UK user-needs guidance includes operations, support and later integrations. Also ask the people who cover the work, resolve errors or keep the workflow running. The decision for or against software should rest on those requirements. Clear responsibility remains necessary after a tool change.

Sources

• GOV.UK: How the discovery phase works

• GOV.UK: Define user needs