After all these years of "processes are the next thing to focus on", I still experience a limited view in organizations of what makes a process perform.
To address some of these aspects, I'll take the example of self scanning and paying your groceries (with suchs a scanning "gun") in the supermarket.
The process is still "getting your groceries home", but the supermarket decided to change (or maybe better, add another version of) the design of the process.
First of all, the workflow has changed. A few steps have been delete and all steps are executed by the customer, now.
So, also the people aspect of the process has changed (do customers understand how it works?).
Information supply also needs to correct (every product needs a correct bar code, otherwise the customer still needs to ask an employee)
And of course, also the supporting software (to scan and pay) should work and physical stuff like the scanning guns, but also a place to store them, should be taken care of.
All together, these aspects will result in how well a process performs.
Actually, what does a supermarket expect from these kind of process changes? For who should it be an improvement?
All the mentioned aspects are things you can "adjust". But also culture is important. It needs trust in the customer. And not to forget; did customers really request these process changes?
Above example was just to make clear that a process is not some "blocks and arrows", but a complex collaboration between all kind of aspects.
But don't forget that the best processes start at the end, so what are actually the goals set for the process result "Groceries paid and in bag of customer"?