Process design, forms & approvals
How this is scored
Modelling the process people take part in: a visual designer or BPMN, forms, approval steps with roles and substitutes, deadlines and escalation, and versioning of a process that is already running — judged on whether a business owner can change a process without breaking the instances in flight.
0 — No human steps at all: neither forms nor approval steps, only machine-to-machine automation.
3 — A visual builder with branching and a simple approval or form step.
5 — A visual designer with conditions and parallel paths, forms and approval steps assigned to roles or groups, and deadlines or reminders for open tasks.
8 — BPMN 2.0 modelling or an equivalent documented notation, versions of a process kept with running instances on their original version, substitutes and escalation chains, multi-stage approvals with four-eyes rules, forms in German with validation and file upload, a task inbox for participants, and a test or simulation mode before publishing.
10 — The process is a governed asset: version history with diff and rollback, migration of running instances to a new version documented, process analytics on cycle time and bottlenecks per step, and the design documented well enough that a business team can maintain it without the vendor.
The Head of IT
BPMN 2.0 modelling with deviation paths, escalation rules and approval chains is documented explicitly, which clears the notation bar I insist on. We found no public information on versioning of a running process, substitutes, forms, a task inbox or a simulation mode, so whether a business owner can change a process without breaking the instances in flight stays open. 2