Why Process Maps Matter and How to Actually Understand Work

In this new article, Stefani Markov explains why process documentation often falls short and how to bring maps (and narratives) back to life.

From “too pretty to read” maps, to visuals that actually guide decisions, this article is for anyone who wants processes to work, not collect dust. We hope it sparks fresh thinking—and helps your team turn workflows into tools.

If you’ve ever opened a process manual, wondered whether it’s the latest version, or watched colleagues completely ignore it—you know the frustration, but this article isn’t about reviving “dusty” documentation. (For tips on bringing process docs back to life, check out my earlier article.) Instead, we’re tackling a different challenge: how to make processes clear, understandable, and easy to follow. Even well-maintained documents are tough to grasp when buried in text. That’s where process maps shine—they turn complex workflows into visual guides, showing steps, decisions, responsibilities, and how work really flows.

Take a simple (and personally favorite) example: boiling an egg. A process map would lay out every step—from filling the pot and heating the water, to timing the boil and peeling that perfect egg. Suddenly, what seems simple becomes structured, repeatable, and impossible to misinterpret. Yet, not all maps are created equal. Some are overly detailed and impossible to scan quickly. Others are colorful but distracting, or “pretty” yet unreadable because the fonts are tiny or squeezed into fancy shapes. Mixed types exist too—which is fine, as long as they actually function.

When I need a quick understanding of a process, I skip the detailed work instructions, SOPs, and concept documents, and head straight for the high-level map. I also like a short narrative alongside. Why both? In my experience, sometimes the map tells the truth, sometimes the narrative does - together, they act as a safety net.

Here’s a question for you: when you look at flowcharts, what drives you nuts? Too complex? Too cluttered? Too much glitter?

In this article, we’ll unpack why most process maps fail—and show how to make yours actually work. Before we tackle the common pitfalls of process maps, let’s get grounded in the basics: what they are, where they come from, and how they’re actually used.

What a Process Map is: More Than Just Boxes and Arrows*

A process map is a visual blueprint of how work flows—showing steps, decisions, roles, and interactions. At a glance, you should be able to see, “this is how we get from start to finish.” Alongside the map sits the process narrative: a short text that adds context and rules the diagram can’t capture. *Yes, this is literally how my mom explains what I do—thanks, Mom!

Process maps turn abstract workflows into diagrams, giving teams a shared language to see how work is performed, where bottlenecks exist, and where value is created. Unlike geographical maps (which show physical space) or circuit diagrams (which show electrical flow), process maps model logic—how activities, roles, and data move.

Evolution of Process Maps & Narratives

Before we get into why maps often fail, it helps to know where they come from. Before flowcharts, narratives ruled. From stone-carved laws to military instructions and guild rules, written words documented “how work gets done.” Process maps appeared much later, in the 1920s, when Frank and Lillian Gilbreth introduced visual charts to streamline industrial work. Since then, the two have evolved side by side: narratives providing the depth and “why,” maps offering speed and clarity. Review them together, and you get both the forest and the trees. From hand-sketched diagrams on clipboards to interactive BPM tools, mapping has matured—but its usefulness still depends more on how people use it than on how precisely it’s drawn. Here’s how the history of maps and narratives lines up:

Types & Levels of Process Maps (and Narratives)

Confusion often starts here. In Lean Six Sigma and Continuous Improvement, you’ll hear terms like SIPOC, swimlane, BPMN, detailed task maps. Each has a place—but use the wrong type (or mix too many), and your “clarity tool” becomes noise. Here’s my two cents:

• High-Level Map (a.k.a. “big picture”)  Think SIPOC or a simple flow with 5–7 steps. The purpose is to explain what happens — not how. Shows what happens from start to finish, no detail. Perfect for onboarding, training, or kicking off a Lean project. Narrative match: a few bullet points, not a manual.

  
  

• Swimlane / Cross-Functional Map  The workhorse of CI projects, it shows handoffs between roles, departments, or systems. It shows who does what, and where handoffs or bottlenecks occur. Best for spotting waste, rework loops, or “too many cooks in the kitchen.” Narrative match: a short description of responsibilities per swimlane.

  
  

• Detailed Process Map (task-level)  Captures every task, decision, and input/output in the process. Useful when you’re doing root cause analysis, automation design, or standard work documentation. But dangerous if you’re just trying to explain “how payroll works” to a new hire. Narrative match: SOPs, work instructions, decision tables.

  
  

• BPMN  Maps It is used to model logic and automation flow. These drive automation, system integration, and workflow tools. Crystal-clear for IT, but usually overkill for operators. Narrative match: technical specs, not bedtime reading. (Although it might get you sleepy faster.)

The trick? Match the map to the purpose and the narrative to the audience. A Lean team doing a kaizen event needs a swimlane, not a BPMN diagram. An auditor wants SOPs, not sticky notes on a wall. A new employee needs a high-level flow and a 1-pager, not 14 Visio tabs.

Or, to borrow from my favorite analogy: if you just want to boil an egg, you don’t need a Michelin-level recipe book. A quick map of “water → boil → egg in → egg out” and a note on timing is enough. If you’re designing a smart kitchen robot, then yes—document the sensor triggers, API calls, and edge cases in detail. Same process, different needs, different documents.

Making Process Maps Useful (Not Just Pretty)

Creating a process map is easy. Making it actually useful—that’s where most organizations stumble. A process map that lives only in a slide deck or a PDF is like an oven that never gets turned on: nice to look at, but it doesn’t cook anything.

Here are the key principles to ensure your process maps drive real improvement:

Focus on the Purpose, Not the Perfection Ask: Who will use this? What decisions or actions should it inform? Which steps, metrics, or handoffs really matter? Pitfall: Overcomplicating the map with every minor step or exception. Example: For boiling eggs, document the essential steps—boil water, add eggs, cook, ice bath, peel. No need to note whether you hum while waiting.

Keep It Readable and Actionable  Do: Use clear labels, logical flow, and highlight decision points or risks. Pitfall: Spaghetti diagram full of tiny shapes, acronyms, or unreadable text. Example: Even a simple swimlane—kitchen counter → stove → pot → eggs → timer → ice bath → peel—is far more useful than a wall of text.

Connect Maps to Metrics and Roles Do: Assign ownership, identify KPIs, and highlight critical points. Pitfall: Leaving steps anonymous and success unmeasured. Without accountability, errors persist.

Make Them Living Documents A process map is not a “set it and forget it” artifact. Do: Encourage updates whenever processes evolve. Treat maps like a garden: prune, adapt, and grow smarter over time. Pitfall: Treating maps as static PDFs that gather dust. Example: If someone discovers that adding a pinch of salt improves peelability, the process map should reflect that tweak. A living map grows smarter over time.

Integrate With Your Workflow Maps are most useful when they’re embedded where decisions happen—in your workflow tools, SOPs, or team dashboards. If a map sits in a folder no one opens, it might as well be a poster. Do: Embed maps in workflows, SOPs, and training so they guide real decisions. Pitfall: Maps sitting forgotten in a folder or a slide deck, never influencing behavior. Example: Keep your egg-boiling map next to the fridge or stove, where it will be useful next time you execute the process.

Combine Maps with Narrative Do: Pair the visual map with a brief narrative that explains the why, exceptions, and rationale. Pitfall: Assuming a diagram alone is enough—nuances get lost, mistakes happen. Example: The map shows “ice bath → peel,” the narrative explains why the ice bath stops cooking and ensures perfect eggs.

Bring Your Process Maps to Life

Process maps are powerful—but only if they work for people, not just for compliance or aesthetics. A well-designed map, paired with clear narrative, living documentation, and real integration into daily work, transforms a static diagram into a tool for learning, accountability, and continuous improvement.

Remember:

• Focus on purpose, not perfection.

• Make maps readable, actionable, and connected to roles and metrics.

• Treat them as living documents, evolving with your processes.

• Pair them with a narrative to explain the why behind the what.

• Embed maps where the work happens—don’t let them gather dust.

Next steps: Take one process you do every day (yes, even something as simple as boiling eggs!) and map it out. Add a short narrative, assign responsibilities, highlight metrics or checkpoints, and post it where it will be used. Test it, tweak it, and watch as your team—or even just your own workflow—becomes smoother, faster, and more reliable.

A map alone won’t cook the eggs—but the right map, with a little story and a living touch, will make sure every egg comes out perfect.

This article is based on my own experience with process documentation. I’m always open to hearing new ideas, approaches, and tips from others in the field. All errors (and oversimplifications) are mine alone.

Ready? Let's talk.