In manufacturing, Toyota identified seven categories of waste. They apply equally to knowledge work — with a different surface appearance but the same underlying structure. The goal is to find where resources are consumed without producing value.
The Seven Wastes in Knowledge Work
| Waste | Description |
|---|---|
| Waiting | Idle time between steps — work blocked pending a decision, review, or dependency |
| Overproduction | Producing more than is needed — reports no one reads, features no one uses |
| Rework | Fixing what should have been right — re-doing work due to unclear requirements or poor handoffs |
| Duplication | The same work being done in two places — parallel efforts, re-discovered knowledge |
| Motion | Unnecessary switching or handoffs — context switching, excessive meetings, process overhead |
| Inventory | Work in progress that is not flowing — large backlogs, features built but not shipped |
| Over-processing | More effort than the task requires — over-engineered solutions, unnecessary polish |
Your Process
Step 1: Map the Workflow or Resource Allocation Describe how work moves through the system — the full path from input to value delivery.
Framing check: Confirm the specific workflow or resource area before continuing. State what you've identified — the system or team being audited and its primary resource inputs — in one sentence, then use AskUserQuestion:
- Question: "I'm reading this as: [your one-sentence framing of the workflow or resource area being audited]. Is that right?"
- Header: "Framing"
- Options:
- Yes — proceed — framing is correct
- Adjust — one element is off; user will correct it before you continue
- Reframe — different situation than read; incorporate the correction before proceeding
Step 2: Scan Each Waste Category For each of the seven wastes: where does it appear in the workflow? Look for specific instances, not general impressions.
Step 3: Quantify Each Waste Estimate roughly how much resource each waste consumes — time per week, headcount, or percentage of capacity. Rough estimates are fine; the goal is to rank, not to audit precisely.
Step 4: Root Cause per Waste Why does this waste exist? Process design? Incentive structure? Unclear ownership? Identifying the root cause determines whether the fix is simple or systemic.
Step 5: Rank by Impact and Recommend Which waste removal would free the most resource?
Before narrowing: Show the complete set of identified waste instances to the user first. Use AskUserQuestion:
- Question: "I've identified [N] waste instances across the seven categories. Before I select the top three by impact, are there any you'd flag as especially important, or any I've missed?"
- Header: "Prioritise"
- Options:
- Proceed with your selection — the set looks right
- Flag one — user will name a specific waste instance to include in the top three
- Add a missing one — user will describe a waste instance not yet identified
Prioritise the top three and propose specific actions.
Human Check-in
Before proceeding, use the AskUserQuestion tool. State your interpretation of the situation in 1–2 sentences — what is being analyzed and what the core question is — then ask:
- Question: "My read: [your 1–2 sentence interpretation]. How do you want to proceed?"
- Header: "Scope"
- Options:
- Full analysis — Complete all steps, reasoning shown throughout
- Key findings only — Bottom-line output, skip step-by-step detail
- Biggest waste items only — Top 3 losses by magnitude, skip smaller inefficiencies
- Reframe — The read is off; correct it and the analysis will follow the corrected framing
Proceed based on their selection. If the user reframes, incorporate the correction before running any analysis.
Output Format
Waste Inventory
| Waste Type | Where It Appears | Estimated Resource Cost | Root Cause |
|---|---|---|---|
| Waiting | ... | ... | ... |
| Overproduction | ... | ... | ... |
| Rework | ... | ... | ... |
| Duplication | ... | ... | ... |
| Motion | ... | ... | ... |
| Inventory | ... | ... | ... |
| Over-processing | ... | ... | ... |
Top 3 Waste Reductions (Ranked by Impact)
- [Waste type] — [Specific action] — [Expected resource freed]
- [Waste type] — [Specific action] — [Expected resource freed]
- [Waste type] — [Specific action] — [Expected resource freed]
Notes
Rework and duplication are usually the most expensive wastes in knowledge work, but waiting is often the most demoralising. Address the highest-cost waste first, but don't ignore the one most affecting morale.
What's Next
After delivering this output, use AskUserQuestion to offer the next move:
- Question: "Waste audited. What's next?"
- Header: "Next"
- Options:
/s4h-resource-allocation-analysis— Reallocate resources freed by eliminating waste/s4h-resource-leverage-mapping— Reinvest freed capacity into high-leverage areas/s4h-decision-criteria-weighting— Weight decisions after waste is removed from the picture- Done — Wrap up and synthesise what we have so far