Using Process Mining to Improve Digital Service Delivery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present a case study of Process Mining (PM) for personnel security screening in the Canadian government. We consider customer (process time) and organizational (cost) perspectives. Furthermore, in contrast to most published case studies, we assess the full process improvement lifecycle: pre-intervention analyses pointed out initial bottlenecks, and post-intervention analyses identified the intervention impact and remaining areas for improvement. Using PM techniques, we identified frequent exceptional scenarios (e.g., applications requiring amendment), time-intensive loops (e.g., employees forgetting tasks), and resource allocation issues (e.g., involvement of non-security personnel). Subsequent process improvement interventions, implemented using a flexible low-code digital platform, reduced security briefing times from around 7 days to 46 hours, and overall process time from around 31 days to 26 days, on average. From a cost perspective, the involvement of hiring managers and security screening officers was significantly reduced. These results demonstrate how PM can become part of a broader digital transformation framework to improve public service delivery. The success of these interventions motivated subsequent government PM projects, and inspired a PM methodology, currently under development, for use in large organizational contexts such as governments.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".