Build the Workflow You Can Learn From

There is a particular kind of pressure that comes with building a new workflow.

Even when we know it is the first version, we often feel as though we should already have every stage mapped, every field defined, every exception anticipated, and every automation ready before anyone begins using it.

But a workflow designed entirely around assumptions can look complete and still miss how the work actually happens.

The first version does not need to answer every future question. It needs to solve the clearest current problem, create enough structure for people to use it consistently, and reveal what we could not have learned before launch.

That is where product thinking can strengthen operational design.

Instead of treating version one as the finished system, we can approach it as a minimum viable process: useful enough to support the work, intentional enough to build upon, and flexible enough to improve through real feedback.

Without that mindset, workflow design often falls into one of two extremes.

We either create a temporary fix designed only for the immediate need, or we overbuild a system that tries to anticipate every possible future scenario.

The first approach may help the team move quickly, but it often produces a process that cannot grow with the work.

The second can delay progress while we design fields, rules, automations, and exceptions before we have enough real use to know which ones matter.

A strong first version sits between those two extremes.

It is not a quick patch that will need to be abandoned later, but it is also not a fully developed system built around hypothetical needs.

It creates a foundation the team can use, test, and improve.

What belongs in version one?

Before building, I find it helpful to get clear on a few essentials:

  • What problem is this workflow solving?
  • Who needs to use it?
  • What information must be visible?
  • Who owns each stage?
  • What outcome should the workflow support?

Once those decisions are clear, the first version can stay relatively simple.

In Asana, that might mean beginning with the essential stages, owners, due dates, dependencies, and a small number of meaningful custom fields.

It may not need every automation, dashboard, reporting layer, or possible exception on day one.

Those additions become more valuable once they are responding to real patterns rather than predictions.

Let the workflow teach you

The first version is not only a solution. It is also a source of information.

Once the team begins using the workflow, we can observe:

  • where tasks repeatedly stall
  • which handoffs create confusion
  • what information is consistently missing
  • which fields people ignore
  • where workarounds begin to appear
  • what work continues to happen outside of Asana

These are not necessarily signs that the workflow failed.

They are signals showing us what the next version needs.

A simple iteration cycle can look like this:

Solve

Address the clearest operational need.

Structure

Create enough consistency for the team to follow the process and make the work visible.

Study

Observe how people actually use the workflow, including where friction and workarounds appear.

Strengthen

Use what you learn to simplify, clarify, automate, or expand the process.

This allows the workflow to grow with the team instead of forcing the team into a system built around assumptions.

Plan the review before launch

One of the easiest ways to keep version one from becoming a permanent workaround is to schedule the review when the workflow is created.

That review could happen after two weeks, one month, or one full project cycle.

The timing will depend on the work, but the purpose is the same:

  • identify what is working
  • surface friction
  • notice what is still happening outside the workflow
  • decide what should change before the next cycle

Without an intentional review point, an early version can remain in place long after the original need has changed.

Eventually, people begin working around the process, and improving it starts to feel more difficult than starting over.

Iteration offers another option: preserve what is working, learn from what is not, and strengthen the workflow one decision at a time.

I have had to learn that good workflow design is not about predicting every future need before launch.

It is about creating enough structure to support the work now while leaving room for the people doing the work to shape what comes next.

The first version does not need to be perfect.

It needs to be useful enough to teach us something.

When you build a new workflow in Asana, how do you decide what belongs in version one and what should wait until the team has had a chance to use it?

9 Likes

This really resonates. The overbuilt version is the one I’ve fell into. I had designed fields and automations for scenarios that never show up, and then the actual friction turns out to be somewhere I never thought to look. The Solve / Structure / Study / Strengthen loop is a nice way to stay honest about that. And scheduling the review at launch is something most people skip. Without it, “temporary” just quietly becomes permanent. On your closing question, I’ve started keeping v1 deliberately under-built and letting the first cycle’s workarounds tell me what v2 should be.

This post from @Vanessa_N explain something similar: ☁️ TGIF: A house (of tasks) in the clouds

4 Likes

Well said, keeping v1 simple and improving it based on real usage is almost always the better path. Real feedback beats guessed edge cases every time.

2 Likes

Thank you for putting this into writing Louisa. I am feeling more and more confident and comfortable in building a v1 as a project manager and am now shifting some of my focus to helping my teams feel that way as well. I’ve found that using phrases like “pilot” have helped get us off the ground with a v1 with an intentional plan to revisit, just like you talked about. I’m curious if you’ve found any helpful ways to communicate this with the teams you work with.

Hi Brittany, I agree words like pilot or foundation work for me as well. Additionally I find it is best to repeat during kickoff that in order to move past pilot or foundation phase it is important for people to provide feedback to shape the segmentation of and move us to a final version of the process. In addition planning surveys or touchpoints at the beginning of preset weekly meeting to gather feedback and continue implementation of the new workflow or process. Lastly having a quarterly check in to make improvements to the project for the first year with yearly maintenance moving forward keeps things fresh and further segmentation, automation, and customization of the process or workflow if it is ongoing. For deadline drive projects that have a template it is best to do an end of project reflection meeting and input feedback into the template to be used the following time the project comes around.