Using Automation in Your Business the Right Way

Anyone who passes releases via e-mail in his company, manually merges Excel files or enters data twice into multiple systems will feel the price of missing automation every day.

Not only in hours and personnel costs, but also in delays, errors and unnecessary dependence on individual employees. That is why automation is no longer an IT topic, but an entrepreneurial decision.

The point is simple: Good automation does not replace people without choice with software. It ensures that recurring processes become reliable, measurable and scalable.

For decision-makers, this means above all one thing: less operational friction and more control over processes, data and responsibilities.

What automation should actually do in mid-sized businesses

Short: Short response: Automation reduces effort, errors and media breaks.

Short response: Automation reduces effort, errors and media breaks.

If you want to use Automatization correctly in the company, you will find concrete services in Legacy-Modernization and Legacy-Code-analysis in 5 days.

In many companies, the topic starts with a too narrow view. Then it's probably just about saving individual handles. That's too short.

Automation becomes really sensible only when it generates a clear business benefit.

Typical objectives are shorter throughput times, fewer errors in data collection, faster response times in service or better usability of process data. in mid-sized businesses, another aspect is also crucial: knowledge must not depend on mailboxes, Excel macros or individual key persons.

When processes are digitally imaged and automated, significantly more operational reliability is created.

This applies to internal processes as well as to customer-oriented processes.

Offers, orders, releases, audits, contract management, support tickets or the transfer between sales and project team - wherever rules, conditions and recurring steps are present, an accurate check is worthwhile.

Where automation pays off very quickly

Short: Not every process is right away.

Not every process is right away. In practice, three types of processes usually provide the fastest benefit.

First, processes with high volume. If the same steps take place daily or weekly dozens of times, small efficiency gains are summed very quickly.

Secondly, processes with many media breaks. As soon as information from emails, PDFs, forms or tables is transferred manually to other systems, the error rate increases.

Automation can provide quality directly here. .Thirdly, processes with clear rules, but high levels of coordination.

Releases, tests, escalations and status changes can be easily digitally mapped when responsibilities and decision paths are defined cleanly.

Less suitable are processes which are still unexplained or permanently change. Anyone who automates an unstable process too early, mainly digitizes disorder. Then the technical effort increases without the operational benefit.

Automation does not start with tools

Short: A frequent error is in order.

A frequent error is in order. First, a platform is searched, then a case of application. It's very rare. The better way begins with the process itself.

What steps are going on today? Where do waiting times arise? What data are needed? What systems are involved? Who decides what and on what basis?

Only when these questions are resolved can it be assessed whether a low-code solution is sufficient, an individual software is more sensible or an interface between existing systems offers the largest lever.

Especially in grown IT landscapes the tool focus is risky. Many companies have used ERP, CRM, DMS, e-mail, specialist applications and different island solutions. Automatization only works clean when the integration architecture is included. Otherwise, a further level of special logic is created, which later becomes expensive in maintenance and operation.

The economic view of automation

Short: Decision-makers do not need a technology debate, but a resilient assessment of effort, risk and benefits.

Decision-makers do not need a technology debate, but a resilient assessment of effort, risk and benefits. Therefore, any automation should be aligned with measurable key figures.

These include processing time per process, error rate, number of manual handovers, reaction times, personnel capacity or transit time until billing.

If these values are coarsely known before project start, the effect can be assessed clean later. This is precisely what separates meaningful digitalization of actionism.

It is also true that not every automation is immediately expected to save time. Sometimes the greater benefit lies in compliance, traceability or scalability.

An automated release process may only save minutes, but reduces liability risks and creates transparency about responsibilities. In regulated industries or in public areas, this is often the more important point.

Automation needs clear technical decisions

Short: As soon as a process is technically understood, it goes to implementation.

As soon as a process is technically understood, it goes to implementation.

Here it quickly shows whether a project has been strategically conceived or should only work short-term. .The central question is: if a standard function is extended, systems are integrated or will an individual process be built up as their own application?

The correct answer depends heavily on existing systems and the requirements for flexibility, data protection and maintainability.

If an ERP system already provides good process logic, targeted expansion can be efficient. However, if several systems have to play together or special logic bursts the standard, a individual solution is often cleaner. This is not automatically more complicated - only more honest in architecture.

Especially in the case of business-critical processes, we should also clarify early who the source code belongs, how operation and support are secured and how GDPR-compliant data processing is implemented.

Those who rely on short-term craft solutions often only save up to the first real change request.

Typical risks in automation

Short: Automation rarely fails the idea.

Automation rarely fails the idea. It fails to meet unclear requirements, poorly linked systems or lack of responsibility in operation.

A classic risk is over-automating. Then it is attempted to automate special cases, exceptions and informal processes to the last. This sounds efficient at first, but often leads to unnecessary complexity.

In many cases, it is more economical to cleanly automate 80 percent of a process and to deliberately provide manual processing for the remaining 20 percent.

Another risk lies in missing data quality. If master data is incomplete, uneven or outdated, the best automation also works with false foundations. The problem is not getting smaller, but faster.

Added to this is the topic of acceptance. Employees do not generally refuse automation. They reject unclear processes, additional clicks and unstable solutions.

When the implementation is understandable, competences remain clear and the benefits of everyday life are perceived, acceptance usually increases significantly.

How does a meaningful automation project work out

Short: In practice, a structured start with limited scope is proven.

In practice, a structured start with limited scope is proven. Not the greatest process is first the best, but the most clear delimitable with measurable benefits.

At the beginning there is a technical and technical inventory. Here, actual process, system landscape, data flows, dependencies and goals are recorded.

The following is a prioritization: Which applications are economically sensible, technically realistic and organizationally viable? ?Only then should the actual solution be conceived.

These include process model, roles, interfaces, safety concept, exceptional treatment and operation.

If you skip this step, the open questions will come back later in development, test and go-live - then usually more expensive.

In the implementation itself, an iterative approach is often most useful. A first running process with clearly defined target image quickly creates transparency.

Additional rules, evaluations or integrations can then be supplemented in a controlled manner. The project remains controllable.

For many companies, this is exactly the point where an experienced implementation partner makes the difference.

Not because internal expertise is lacking, but because architecture, interfaces, data protection, operation and maintainability must be thought together from the outset.

Groenewold IT Solutions focuses on clear project paths, transparent walls and individual implementation from a single source - Made in Germany and GDPR-compliant.

When standard software is enough - and when not

Short: The honest answer is: it depends.

The honest answer is: it depends. Standard software can be completely sufficient for clearly outlined, industry-standard processes.

This is especially true when processes are close to the market standard and require low differentiation.

However, as soon as several systems have been linked, individual release logics have to be mapped or existing legacy structures have to be taken into account, standard software quickly reaches limits.

Then workarounds, additional tools and manual secondary processes are created. At this point you lose the advantage that the standard should actually bring.

Individual automation is especially useful when processes are business-critical, the requirements clearly differ from the standard or long-term control over logic, data and further development is important.

It is not crucial whether a solution is standard or individual. The decisive factor is whether it fits the company and remains serviceable for years.

Automation as leadership task

Short: At the end, automation is not a pure IT project.

At the end, automation is not a pure IT project. It concerns decisions on responsibility, priorities, process quality and growth.

Anyone who only treats them as a software introduction will often remain among the possibilities.

The strongest results are created where specialist and IT work together on a clear target image. Then, from a digitalization request, a loadable process with measurable effect becomes.

This is exactly what creates feasibility - operational, technical and economic. .The best entry is rarely the biggest throw.

Often a cleanly defined process is sufficient, which finally works without media break, double care and release chaos.

If this results in a reliable standard, the benefit does not grow theoretically, but in the ongoing operation.

Technical sources and further links

Short: The following independent references complement the classification on the topics of this Article:

The following independent references complement the classification on the topics of this Article:

• Bitkom – Digital Economy Association
• BSI – Federal Office for Information Security
• European Commission – Digital Strategy
• MDN Web Docs (Mozilla)
• W3C – World Wide Web Consortium

"AI in mid-sized businesses is worthwhile where measurable processes and clean data bases exist – the pilot must have a clear criterion of success."

— *Björn Groenewold, Managing Director, Groenewold IT Solutions *