Part 3 workflow/SOP progression. Course path note: Part 3 workshop page for enrolled learners.
Part 3 | Practice workshop
Define the workflow input packet, output format, acceptance standard, missing-input rule, and review owner.
The manager asks what each workflow candidate needs as input and what output it must produce.
The trap is defining input/output loosely. D63 must name required inputs, optional inputs, output artifact, evidence, and readiness signal.
“Input: customer information. Output: renewal-risk summary.”
The weak version contains customer information, summary, no required evidence, no readiness signal.
Blocks the workflow if missing.
The work product created.
How humans know it is ready or blocked.
Use this rule before filling the build table. The goal is a decision-ready artifact, not a broad summary.
Blocks the workflow if missing.
The work product created.
How humans know it is ready or blocked.
The worker selected a repeated renewal-risk update, but the process will drift unless the input packet and output standard are explicit.
Define the workflow input packet, output format, acceptance standard, missing-input rule, and review owner.
Breaking down steps before knowing what input is required and what output must be accepted.
Core: 3 input-output rows; Deep: improve the same 3 rows with stronger evidence, limits, and repair notes. Do not map steps until required input/output and missing-input rule are visible.
Previous artifact: D62 repeated_task_candidates.md
Next artifact: D64 step_breakdown.md
Learning checkpoint: Keep the handoff useful to the next lesson by naming evidence, limitation, owner, and stop rule.
This page keeps Day 63 connected to the surrounding course path. Use the previous artifact as working input, produce today's artifact, and hand it to the next lesson with limitations visible.
For renewal-risk review, the input packet is account list, renewal date, latest support notes, and owner. The output is a risk summary with caveat and next action. Missing renewal date triggers a stop, not a guess.
If the output asks for a risk label, the input must include current account evidence. If it does not, write a missing-input rule before adding another step.
Use these cards before the wide table so the example does not depend on horizontal scrolling.
Input/output contract example
If the output asks for a risk label, the input must include current account evidence. If it does not, write a missing-input rule before adding another step.
| No. | Workflow candidate | Required input | Optional input | Output format | Acceptance standard | Missing-input rule | Review owner | D64 step need |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Weekly renewal-risk update | CRM risk fields, latest account note, renewal date | Customer success comment | Manager-ready risk summary with evidence links | Every risk claim has source and requested decision | If CRM note missing, mark unknown and request owner update | Sales ops lead | Break into collect, verify, classify, draft, review, send |
Core: 3 input-output rows; Deep: improve the same 3 rows with stronger evidence, limits, and repair notes. Do not map steps until required input/output and missing-input rule are visible. Blank required fields create export warnings.
| No. | Workflow candidate | Required input | Optional input | Output format | Acceptance standard | Missing-input rule | Review owner | D64 step need |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ||||||||
| 2 | ||||||||
| 3 |
Use this pass to find the row that would make the artifact look ready while hiding evidence gaps, unclear owner decision, missing exception, or weak handoff.
Weak row: Input: customer info; output: summary.
Repair move: Add required evidence, optional context, output artifact, evidence used, and ready/block signal.
Better row: Input: current CRM renewal note; optional support ticket; output: risk summary with source; ready if source current, blocked if stale.
Choose the row you would be comfortable carrying into the next day.
Choose the row most likely to fail before AI use.
Sentence starter: The weak row is weak because ___. I will repair it by adding ___ before using AI.
This file is today’s work receipt. It should show the exact decision or handoff that the next day can use, not just that you filled a table.
What this artifact proves: This file proves the learner can define workflow inputs and outputs tightly enough to execute.
Weak export: Input: customer info; output: summary.
Good export: Input: current CRM renewal note; optional support ticket; output: risk summary with source; ready if source current, blocked if stale.
Click Generate Markdown to create workflow_io_definition.md.
Built from your course work.