This document summarizes Roberta Oberpriller's presentation on process mapping at the TargetX Summit. Some key points: 1) Process mapping at the institution has gone through multiple iterations over the past few years in an effort to map the student lifecycle and identify pain points. Challenges included resources and establishing process mapping as a standard practice. 2) For an online application project, process maps were used to define the application review process and identify opportunities to streamline workflows and simplify the student experience. This included reducing duplicate efforts and confusion. 3) Lessons learned include the importance of executive sponsorship, managing the challenges inherent in process mapping, and using process maps to focus project teams and contain scope creep

1. #TargetXSummit
Mapping Your Processes to Deliver an
Exceptional Student Experience
Roberta Oberpriller

2. “The first principle for any automation you contemplate
introducing into a business is that:
Automation applied to an efficient operation will magnify
the efficiency.
The second is that:
Automation applied to an inefficient operation will
just entrench the inefficiency. “
Bill Gates

3. PROCESS MAPPING

4. Mapping the Student Life Cycle
Our mapping journey
• Multiple internal attempts
• 2016 – consultant work focused on
processes
• 2017 – consultant focused on high-level
Enrollment management “to-be”
processes
Challenges
• Resources, executive leadership
• Identified multiple pain-points, addressed
‘low-hanging’ opportunities, roadmap for
future
• Fill in the blanks, establish a ‘culture’
where mapping becomes standard
practice

5. Process Mapping Guiding Principles
● Student experience should drive our process.
● The process should not drive the experience.
● Champion simplicity and sound business practice
● Insure tidiness and the intended use of the TargetX platform
● Insure scalability for future initiatives.

6. Setting Expectations
Processes support
strategy/direction
Technology and
job functions enable
processes

7. Process Mapping Identified
• How we are engaging with students
• When we are engaging with students
• What are we ‘talking’ about
• Are students getting conflicting/mixed
messages
• Do engagements build relationships
• What ‘message’ are we sending
• Process roadblocks
• Are we meeting students where they are
at?
• Are our touch points proactive or reactive
• Transactional to-do lists
• Blind-spots – communication strategy,
inter-departmental collaboration
• Are we mentoring, helping students
succeed? Or are we ‘nagging’?
• How students perceive communications –
nagging or helpful
• Duplication of effort, out of sync,
inefficiencies, not sharing, asking for info
we already have

8. INTEGRATING PROCESS MAPPING
INTO A PROJECT

9. Are We Really So Unique?

10. TargetX Online Application Project
• Defined High Level processes in Prospect to Confirm life cycle
• Apply, application review, decision, confirm/deposit
• Critical decisions made at this point – data integrations, system of record for applications
• Define specific details of key processes
• Application review process

11. Changing Environment
Old:
Prospects, Inquiries and Applicants all
lived on application object (Funnel)
Multiple application sources: Royall,
College Net, Common App, CAS
Data Integrations: Application data to
Banner to TargetX to Eloqua
Banner system of record
New:
Prospects and Inquiries move to Inquiry
object
Application object only holds applicants
Application sources: TargetX, Common App,
CAS
Data Integrations: Application data to
TargetX to Banner at confirm
TargetX becomes system of record for
Enrollment Management

12. How We Are Using Process Mapping
Application configuration – what questions are needed to
make a decision – only ask those questions
Exception – special circumstances processes – simplify –
clarity for applicants
Application Review Process (Traditional UG)
Defining commonalities across all EM processes from
questions on application to review, scorecards etc
Flows, Process Builder, Workflows
Multiple touches by the same person (7 times)
Formalize a new process in order to implement ART
– meaningful review and decisions for applicants
(reduce risks)
Key to meeting our goal of Simplicity
Consolidation, streamlining to positively impact
system performance
Streamline processes – quicker decisions, less
confusion for students and staff

13. LESSONS LEARNED

14. Executive Sponsorship is Critical
Sets the stage and expectation
Makes the process less threatening
Not designed to find fault, but designed to
identify opportunities
Outside leadership keeps things neutral

15. Process Mapping is Messy
First create chaos
Create order out of this chaos
Individuals have different tolerances for
chaos
Some thrive when faced with the
challenge of creating order
Others shut down
Recognize this and manage the team

16. Persistence Pays
Two stages:
Defining the ‘As-Is’
Envisioning the ‘To-Be’
‘As-Is’
Some will have trouble defining their
process and committing it to a map
‘To-Be’
Some will have trouble imagining a
different way
Takes time to ingrain it in the culture

17. Foundational to Project Success
• Keeps team focused on student
experience
• Serves as the roadmap
• Constant checking against the process
• Helps contain scope creep
• Facilitates decision making
Applicant Portal

18. Successes
• Project team members are developing process maps on their own.
Bring process maps to team meetings and sharing them
Planning to use the maps as part of their training.
• Low-hanging wins
• Early notification of accommodation needs – better planning by Center for Equal Access
• OneStop proactive engagement with students (Holds campaign)

19. What’s the FUTURE?

20. #TargetXSummit
Thank You
Roberta Oberpriller
roberpri@css.edu