A new problem often produces a new commitment: another meeting, report, approval step or project. The accumulated work receives less scrutiny than the latest addition.
Before adding a solution, examine what can be removed from the arrangement already in place.
Make subtraction an explicit option
In a process review, ask two questions separately: what would improve this, and what could we stop doing? A separate question gives removal a proper hearing rather than treating it as an afterthought.
Look for steps whose original purpose has expired. An approval introduced during a crisis may still apply after the risk has changed. A report may continue even though its intended reader no longer uses it.
Test removal without losing the safeguard
Name the function a step serves before eliminating it. If an approval catches a real financial exposure, removing it requires another way to manage that exposure. If nobody can explain the function, a limited trial may be appropriate.
Choose one change, define what you will watch and set a review date. For example, suspend a weekly status meeting while keeping a written exception report. Check whether coordination or delivery becomes worse.
When authorizing new work, identify the capacity it will use. If the team cannot name what will move, the new commitment is being added to an already full system.
A stop list should be reviewed alongside the priority list. Otherwise, prioritization can become a way to describe an ambition while leaving the workload unchanged.
