Communicating Process Variants Effectively in Your Management System

What Exactly Is a Process Variant?

Process variants fall into two main categories:

• Simple case differentiation:
  These are legitimate, known variations — for example, when a release threshold determines whether a process follows path A or B. The variation still leads to the same process outcome and is considered acceptable.
• Non-compliant process execution:
  This occurs when the process goal is missed, or the method used should not be repeated. Common reasons include excessive cost, high error risk, or non-compliance with regulations. These variants should not be documented or promoted within the management system. If such patterns appear repeatedly, you should clearly flag them in your process documentation as unacceptable alternatives.

Why Process Variants Are a Challenge for Moderators

There’s no one-size-fits-all answer to how process variants should be communicated. In any organization, you’ll encounter countless variations, such as:

• Creating an offer domestically vs. internationally
• Assembly with or without third-party components
• Inpatient vs. outpatient admission
• Service orders with or without spare parts
• Sales to new vs. existing customers

Creating a separate process description for every variant would lead to duplicated steps and conflicting content — and put the burden on employees to figure out which version applies. The risk of choosing the wrong path increases.

4 Strategies for Communicating Process Variants

If there’s no single best way to document process variants, what are your options?

1. Document only the most common path (the “Happy Path”)
Stick to the standard. This makes modeling and maintenance simple. But beware: less frequent variants are often the ones where clarity is most needed to avoid costly mistakes.

2. Add sub-processes to the main variant

Identify the steps that cause a branch and illustrate how and where variants diverge — and ideally, converge again. This makes the relationship between the main process and its variants easy to follow. However, this approach requires a deep understanding of the overall process structure.

3. Create separate process descriptions for each variant

This makes sense if different roles or owners are responsible for each variant, or if you want to explicitly highlight differences and common ground. Just be sure to define a clear decision point at the start of the process so users know which version to follow. Later, you can always consolidate the variants into a main process with sub-processes (see strategy 2).
‍

‍

‍4. Consolidate all variants into one description
‍
This approach works when standardization is the goal. It defines precisely which steps apply under which conditions. The benefit? Clarity and comparability. The downside? A complex, potentially overwhelming process document — so this only works if users can reliably choose the right path.

Focus on Common Ground

When documenting variants, there’s a tendency to focus on differences. But shared steps are just as important. They help determine which strategy is most efficient and sustainable.

Also keep in mind: many variants emerge over time — for emotional or historical reasons. These can be stumbling blocks, especially during harmonization. Ask yourself:

• Why did this variant arise in the first place?
• What would happen if we eliminated it tomorrow?
• Which variant do our customers prefer — and why?