map-the-work

Part of the Overpowered skill suite. Build an evidence-aware current-state map of how work actually happens across people, systems, decisions, handoffs, exceptions, and tacit rules. Use when a business process must be understood before improvement, redesign, or automation.

Overpowered / Map the Work

Core rule

Map how work currently happens, not merely how documentation says it should happen, and do not redesign it unless asked.

Current-state understanding is independently useful. This skill is not a mandatory precondition for automation when the process is already sufficiently clear.

Mapping protocol

1. Set the boundary. Name the trigger/start, intended outcome/end, scope, and actors/systems in scope. Do not silently expand to the whole organization.
2. Gather available evidence. Inspect procedures, forms, spreadsheets, tickets, logs, messages, screenshots, examples, data dictionaries, and prior maps before interviewing unnecessarily. Discoverable facts should not become questions for the user.
3. Keep three views separate:
   • DOCUMENTED: what policy or procedure says should happen;
   • OBSERVED / EVIDENCED: what artifacts, data, and examples show happens;
   • REPORTED / TACIT: what people say they do or decide. Do not silently collapse disagreements; use reconcile if a material conflict must be resolved.
4. Map the flow. Capture trigger, inputs, activities, decisions, handoffs, actors, systems, data/artifacts, and outputs without optimizing them.
5. Expose invisible work. Look for queues, waits, re-entry, rework, duplicate entry, manual reconciliation, copy/paste, shadow spreadsheets, out-of-band messages, escalation, tacit judgment, approvals, late/missing inputs, system boundaries, and local workarounds.
6. Map variants proportionately. Identify common variants and material exception families. Route complex branch modeling to find-the-exceptions rather than duplicating it.
7. Mark evidence status. Classify important claims as confirmed, inferred, reported, or unknown. An interview report is not established truth without corroboration.
8. Identify friction without redesigning. Record delays, rework, ambiguity, duplicate handling, error-prone transfers, poor traceability, bottlenecks, and unnecessary intervention. Keep current-state observation distinct from future-state recommendation.
9. Test sufficiency. Stop when the map supports the user's next decision. If automation follows, use find-the-exceptions only when branches require it, then automate-this.

Output contract

text

Process
<name + boundary>

Trigger
...

Outcome
...

Current-state flow
1. ...

Decisions
- decision / actor / input / rule or judgment

Handoffs
- from → to / artifact / failure risk

Systems & data
- ...

Variants / exceptions
- ...

Tacit work
- ...

Friction
- ...

Evidence status
- confirmed:
- reported:
- inferred:
- unknown:

Material gaps
- ...

Ready for next step?
YES / NO — <conditional next skill or missing evidence>

Keep the representation proportional to process complexity.

Gotchas

• Do not equate the documented process with actual practice.
• Do not treat a single interviewee's account as confirmed truth.
• Do not optimize, redesign, or automate while claiming to map current state.
• Do not produce a decorative flowchart that omits handoffs, waits, rework, tacit judgment, or evidence status.
• Do not demand exhaustive discovery when the map already supports the next decision.
• Do not remap a complete current-state specification before direct automation.

Stop condition

Stop when the bounded flow, material variants, invisible work, evidence status, friction, and gaps are clear enough for the user's stated next step.