Business Orchestration & Operating Model Transformation
Redesigning how work moved across people, processes and technology to reduce fragmented handoffs, clarify accountability and create a more controlled route from business intent to execution.
The Problem Was Bigger Than Individual Process Inefficiency
Work was moving through multiple systems, manual handoffs and disconnected processes. Teams could complete individual activities, but the end to end journey depended on people translating requests, switching between systems and coordinating execution manually.
The visible symptoms were operational friction and inconsistent execution. The deeper issue was the operating model. Business intent, process ownership, decision making, controls and technology were not sufficiently connected.
Fragmented Workflows
Work moved between systems and teams through multiple handoffs, creating friction and unnecessary coordination.
Intent and Execution Were Disconnected
Users knew what outcome they needed, but translating that intent into system activity required several intermediate steps.
Accountability Could Blur Across the Journey
When multiple people and systems contributed to an outcome, it was harder to maintain clear ownership of decisions and controls.
Automation Alone Would Not Solve the Problem
Automating existing handoffs without redesigning the operating model would risk making an inefficient process faster rather than making it better.
How should work move through the organisation before deciding what technology should automate?
We Treated the Problem as an Operating Model Challenge
Map the Real Work
We looked beyond formal process descriptions to understand how requests, decisions, handoffs and exceptions actually moved through the organisation.
Separate Intent From System Execution
We distinguished what the user was trying to achieve from the sequence of system actions currently required to achieve it.
Identify Where Judgement Needed to Remain Human
Not every activity or decision should be automated. The model needed clear points where accountable human review and approval remained.
Redesign the Control Environment With the Workflow
Governance, evidence and accountability needed to form part of the new operating process rather than being applied after execution.
The Model Connected Six Operating Components
The solution was designed around the operating model required to support consistent execution, not around introducing technology in isolation.
Business Intent
Define the outcome or action the user is trying to initiate.
Workflow
Determine the sequence of activities required to fulfil that intent.
Roles & Accountability
Clarify ownership across initiation, execution, decisions and exceptions.
Decision Rights
Define what could progress automatically and where approval was required.
Governance & Controls
Build evidence, permissions, oversight and accountability into execution.
Technology Enablement
Use orchestration and automation to support the redesigned process.
From Business Intent to Controlled Execution
The redesigned model created a clearer path between what a user wanted to achieve and how the organisation executed that request.
Intent
What outcome is being requested?
Interpret
What process and information are required?
Route
Which workflow, system or role owns the next action?
Control
What permissions, approvals or checks apply?
Execute
Complete the authorised activity.
Evidence
Maintain traceability of what happened and why.
Moving From Design Into a Workable Operating Model
Redesigned the Workflow
Removed unnecessary handoffs and reorganised execution around the intended outcome rather than existing system boundaries.
Clarified Roles and Decision Rights
Defined ownership, approval responsibilities and the points where accountable human intervention needed to remain.
Embedded Governance Into Execution
Permissions, controls, evidence and traceability were treated as part of the workflow rather than separate governance activity.
Used Technology as the Enabler
Orchestration and automation were introduced only after the operating process, ownership and controls had been defined.
Validated the End to End Journey
The redesigned workflow was considered from request through execution, exception handling, evidence and completion.
Automation Did Not Replace Accountability
The operating model distinguished activities that could be automated from decisions that still required accountable human judgement.
Automated Execution
Repeatable, authorised and sufficiently controlled activities could progress through the workflow with less manual intervention.
Human Judgement
Decisions involving approval, material risk, exceptions or accountability remained subject to explicit human review.
What the Transformation Established
Previous Operating Risk
Capability Established
What This Case Study Demonstrates
Operating Model Design
Connecting people, processes, governance, decisions and technology around a defined business outcome.
Process Transformation
Redesigning end to end workflows rather than optimising isolated activities.
Decision Rights & Accountability
Clarifying ownership, authority, approvals and exception handling.
Governance by Design
Embedding controls, evidence and accountability into normal execution.
Technology Enabled Change
Using automation and orchestration to support the operating model rather than define it.
Implementation Thinking
Designing the target model alongside how work would actually move through it in practice.
Is the Way Your Organisation Works Still Fit for What It Needs to Deliver?
Talk to MABY about where processes, ownership, decisions, controls or technology are creating friction and what needs to change across the wider operating model.
Discuss Your Transformation →