Case 03: what process insight and intervention data are needed?

HVE-DECISIONS-1.0. Fictional interview/design feedback. RULE-03 and process-events.csv define the baseline.

Client interview evidence

• C03-F1 / Omar: "Orders take too long. I think rekeying is the cause, but we have not measured active handling time."
• C03-F2 / Finance: "Credit decisions remain ours. Reminding us is different from approving credit."
• C03-F3 / Omar: "We need to see where cases wait and which are still incomplete."
• C03-F4 / Reviewer: "Repeated reminders may be noise. I want to see whether the item is still pending and whether someone already followed up."
• C03-F5 / Sponsor: "A small trial must tell us whether the intervention helps, not just whether an automation exists."

Technology-specific decision context

Process Mining needs a case identity and historical activity/timestamp events. A reminder feature needs current pending work and follow-up history; an event log does not automatically supply that state.

Decide whether the first intervention is a reviewer rota, reminder automation or further observation. Define only the event/work/experiment/follow-up data required for that choice.

Proposal to inspect

• C03-P1: The 14 event rows are 14 cases, and incomplete cases can be counted as zero duration.
• C03-P2: A current-status table is enough to reconstruct historical waiting.
• C03-P3: The reminder needs no record of attempted/successful follow-up.

Change for discussion

• C03-C1: Omar wants to compare a rota with a reminder pilot. Identify the minimum experiment/group/observation data needed.
• C03-C2: A failed notification should not mean "reviewer was reminded." Decide how that affects the state/history model.

Supplied fictional design-review feedback

No executed reminder, mining refresh or achieved process improvement is supplied.