For our second blog post we were asked to discuss a process from our current or future field and then describe how we would improve upon that process.
I currently work at a veterinary hospital where we use a veterinary practice management software called AVImark. One of the many features of this software is the ability to attach documents and other digital media to codes in the medical history section. This allows us to electronically access things that we might otherwise only find in the patients actual paper chart, like lab work from an outside site, or discharge instructions etc.
Currently the process by which we attach these items is a bit cumbersome. We scan the document from the paper chart to our shared network folder. We then open AVImark and find the appropriate patient, and the code that we would like to attach it too, and then go into the shared folder find the file and attach it. Continue reading
In route setting for rock climbing, it is the route setter’s job to put up holds on a blank climbing wall designed to be fun and to not injure climbers. Sometimes that is the only guidance that is given to a setter before their session begins. Other times there are more instructions such as the difficulty they must set, the type of holds they should use, or certain features on the wall they need to avoid. Due to the freedom a route setter has, this job is considered a form of art. At RIT’s Red Barn rock climbing gym, setters typically pick out holds from buckets on the ground and lay them out on the mats. Some of these holds are for hands and others are for feet. Sometimes the holds must be used for both. Once they have decided they like the sequence they have set, they place tape on the walls where they plan to put the holds, then they bolt the holds into the wall. Once the wall is done, a group of forerunners climb the problems and decide if any changes are needed. This is a process that takes several hours. For competitions, it is important to set these problems quickly. There are several processes that I think could potentially be faster. One option is to pick out only the hand holds they plan to use. Once they go through their typical sequence and bolt them to the wall, they could decide where to put the feet and bolt these in later. This is beneficial because setters oftentimes bolt footholds that are not needed for the climb. Another option to shorten the process would be to set the crux, the most difficult part of the climb, first. If the crux was in the middle, the setter would work up and down in order to establish a flow that is both fun and difficult. This would be beneficial for competition setting because as a route setter gets ideas, he or she could bolt a few holds in and then come back to it later to finish the route and make sure it runs smoothly.
Within the quick service sector of the food and beverage industry, their seems to be two prevailing processes when it comes to taking a customer’s order, filling that order, and accepting payment. The order of these steps can change the way a customer perceives a restaurant and can influence revenue directly.
The most common version of this process includes recording the customer’s order, accepting payment, then filling the order. This process can be seen in many major fast food chains and seems to be the most efficient way to conduct this process however there are other options that can change the tone of the order taking process entirely.
Another, slightly less popular method for this process is to first take the customer’s order, then fill the order, then accept payment at the end of the process. This is more useful in situations where an order requires a lot of customization and options that do not influence the price of a product. This can also lead to less perceived waiting time because the customer is constantly engaged in the food making process thus, making the time seem to pass more quickly.
Each of these methods has their strengths and weaknesses in certain situations which are why there is no single best method for this process. The main tradeoff seems to be in the amount of perceived waiting time versus the actual waiting time where the first method usually has less actual waiting time and the second method usually has less perceived waiting time.
– Thomas Skowronski