Not Every Process Needs Redesign – How to Use the Harmon Matrix to Prioritize Improvement Work

You have just finished a stakeholder meeting and three department heads all want process improvements, preferably yesterday. Finance is pushing for a procurement redesign. Operations wants the reporting workflow fixed. HR is asking for an onboarding process review. The requests are legitimate, but the organizational bandwidth is limited. Where do you start?

This is one of the most common challenges business analysts face, and one rarely discussed. Knowing what needs improving is one thing. Knowing how to prioritize improvements is something else. That is where the Harmon Process-Strategy Matrix becomes useful.

What Is the Harmon Matrix?

Developed by business process expert Paul Harmon, the Harmon Matrix (also referred to as the Process-Strategy Matrix) is a two-by-two grid for evaluating and classifying business processes. It asks two fundamental questions: how complex and dynamic is this process, and how strategically important is it to the organization?

The vertical axis measures process complexity and dynamics. At the lower end sit straightforward, stable processes. These are processes with a clear sequence of steps, few decision points, and stable rules. Sorting incoming mail or processing a standard expense claim would represent this. At the upper end reside complex, dynamic processes. These involve significant human judgment, many variables, expertise that is difficult to codify, and business rules that shift frequently in response to market or regulatory change. Negotiating partnership agreements or managing international credit lines would fit in this category.

The horizontal axis measures strategic importance. On the left are processes that need to happen but do not directly differentiate the organization or add significant added value to its products and services. They are necessary but essentially commodity activities. On the right are processes that are central to the organization’s success: they drive competitive advantage, shape customer experience, or represent the core of what the business does and sells.

The combination of these two dimensions places every process in one of four quadrants, each pointing toward a different improvement strategy.

 

The Harmon Process-Strategy Matrix

The Four Quadrants in Practice of the Harmon Matrix

Bottom-left: Low Complexity, Low Strategic Importance

These are routine, commodity processes with few decision points and little direct impact on the organization’s competitive position. Think of administrative processes that need to happen reliably and cheaply, but that no one would claim as a source of added value. The right response to these processes is efficient automation. ERP modules, workflow tools, or standard software applications can handle these processes well, and the goal is to do so at the lowest possible cost.

As a BA, your contribution is to help the organization recognize that this process does not need a redesign project. It needs a standard solution implemented efficiently.

Bottom-right: Low Complexity, High Strategic Importance

These processes are directly tied to the organization’s success but are relatively stable and straightforward in how they operate. A manufacturing assembly process is a classic example: the steps may be well-defined and consistent, but the end product is exactly what the company sells. The priority here is to make these processes as efficient, consistent, and reliable as possible, and automation is often the most effective direction.

BAs contribute here by supporting lean improvement work and by clarifying requirements for automation initiatives. The complexity is not in the process itself but in making the right choices about tooling and ensuring that what gets automated genuinely reflects how the process should run.

Upper-left: High Complexity, Low Strategic Importance

These are processes that cause problems when they fail, are genuinely difficult to manage, but do not add significant added value to what the organization actually delivers. International compliance reporting, for example, can be extraordinarily complex and heavily regulated, yet it is a “must-do” activity rather than a source of competitive advantage.

The recommended response here is outsourcing. Another organization that specializes in this type of work can manage the complexity more efficiently and at lower cost than an internal team that has to maintain that expertise as a side concern. Your role as a BA is to help build the business case for outsourcing, define service requirements, and support the transition.

Upper-right: High Complexity, High Strategic Importance

This is the quadrant that demands your most serious attention. These are processes that are both central to the organization’s success and genuinely difficult to improve, often because they involve significant human judgment, expertise, and variability. New product development, complex client onboarding in a regulated environment, or processes that depend on negotiation and relationship management all tend to reside here.

These processes cannot be reduced to a script or a decision tree without losing something essential. They require structured redesign work, careful requirements elicitation, deep stakeholder engagement, and change management. This is where BA skills make the most difference, and where improvement investment is most justified.

Example for a bakery shop:

How to Apply It in Practice

Using the matrix well starts with careful evaluation of the processes. Both dimensions require investigation. For complexity, ask how many interdependent steps or decisions does a process involve? How often does a process evolve due to market, tech, or regulatory shifts (low dynamics = stable; high = volatile)? Does a process require specialized judgment, creativity, or adaptability beyond routines?

For strategic importance, ask what happens if this process is abandoned or fails, does it threaten survival, revenue, or key goals? Does a process directly impact core stakeholders (e.g., customers, shareholders, regulators)? Is it a differentiator for competitive advantage or tied to mission-critical outcomes?

If you have access to performance data, it can inform your assessment of complexity and strategic importance. It is a classification tool. A process can be healthy and still belong in the outsource quadrant. A process can be performing well and still be the highest priority for redesign, if complexity and strategic stakes are both high.

Running the exercise as a workshop has lots of value to stakeholders. Invite one or two stakeholders who understand both the operational side and the strategic direction of the business. Disagreements about where a process belongs uncover important tacit knowledge helping all interested to understand the process and its characteristics.

Once processes are classified, use the matrix to frame your recommendations on next steps. If a process belongs in the redesign quadrant, make the case for investing BA effort there. If a process belongs in the outsource quadrant, say so, even if it is politically awkward. The matrix gives you an objective framework to anchor that conversation.

Common Pitfalls

The most frequent mistake is confusing process visibility with strategic importance. A process that affects many people, or that generates a lot of internal complaints, is not automatically strategic. Challenge that assumption, particularly when stakeholders conflate how noticeable a process is with how central it is to the business.

A related risk is overestimating complexity. Some processes feel complex because they are poorly documented or inconsistently executed, not because they genuinely involve high levels of judgment or expertise. A process that is complex due to poor design may actually belong in the bottom half of the matrix once it is properly understood. That matters because it changes the recommended intervention.

Finally, remember that this classification is not permanent. Strategic priorities shift, processes evolve, and technology changes what can be automated. A process that belonged in the upper-right quadrant five years ago may have moved as tooling improved or as the competitive landscape changed. Revisiting the matrix periodically is worth building into your regular process management practice.

Where to Start

If the matrix is new to you, try it first with a small set of processes that are already generating discussion in your organization. Plot them with stakeholders, be honest about both axes, and discuss what quadrant each process falls into. 

The value of the Harmon Matrix is not just in the prioritization it produces. It is in the discipline it introduces: before deciding how to improve a process, first understand what kind of process it actually is. That question is simpler than it sounds, and answering it well is what separates thoughtful improvement work from a backlog of initiatives that never quite deliver what they promised.

Back to Blog