TenkaTenka
Sign in

Tenka Help Center › Where work gets stuck › Process breakdowns

Process breakdowns

The place where the points at which the process tears are recorded — rework, waiting, overload, missing data, excess control, repeated error and misallocated talent — prioritized by a comparable criterion.

🕒 Updated on Aug 31, 2026📖 ~2 min read

What you find on this screen

A portrait of the screen, read from the screen itself — it changes when the screen changes.

Available actions

Run detectorsNew disruptionRecord as disruptionNot a problemSaveCloseFilterClear

Form fields

RupturaO que está quebrado, dito na linguagem de quem sofre com isso.
TipoNatureza da ruptura: falta de padrão, retrabalho, espera, erro de sistema.
OrigemComo a ruptura apareceu: relato de quem executa, auditoria ou detecção automática.
SetorOnde a ruptura dói. Serve para chamar a pessoa certa para a conversa.
GravidadeTamanho do estrago quando a ruptura acontece. Entra no cálculo do GUT.
UrgênciaO quanto não dá para esperar. Entra no cálculo do GUT.
TendênciaSe o problema piora sozinho com o tempo. Entra no cálculo do GUT.
FacilidadeO quanto é fácil resolver. Ruptura grave e fácil é a primeira a atacar.
InvestimentoQuanto de dinheiro ou esforço o conserto pede.
SituaçãoSe a ruptura está aberta, em tratamento ou resolvida.
EvidênciaO fato que prova a ruptura: o número, o e-mail, o caso concreto. Sem evidência a discussão volta.

Start here

What it's for
Moving from a list of complaints to a defensible order of attack. Each pain point receives five scores, and the resulting criticality level says where to start, with the criteria open for anyone who wants to discuss it.

Rules

Why the score is multiplicative
The score is severity × urgency × trend × ease × investment (maximum 3125). Multiplying instead of adding makes a pain point that's severe, urgent AND easy to solve jump ahead of several medium ones — which is exactly the right call when you have little energy to spare.
The scores come with a phrase, not standalone
Each score from 1 to 5 has a written definition next to it ("extremely severe damages," "very easy to solve," "needs no investment"). Without that, one person's 4 is another's 2, and prioritization stops being comparable — including with yourself three months later.
The detector doesn't create pain points on its own
The detectors scan the real data and PROPOSE: reopened demands, a queue stalled for over 15 days, a stage that always gets sent back, an approval triggered dozens of times that never rejected anything, people above 100% of capacity, menu screens no one opens, deadlines chronically blowing past, and goals from different areas pushing against each other. Every suggestion comes with the number that backs it up, and nothing is registered without you accepting it.

Frequently asked questions

Where to start when there are dozens?
By the Pareto curve: the highlighted pain points concentrate 80% of the total problem. Then look at the distribution by TYPE — it reveals the pattern. A lot of wait time points to a bottleneck and queue; a lot of excessive control points to a process designed out of distrust; a lot of rework points to a poorly defined agreement on "done."
Was this article helpful?

In the same module: Where work gets stuck14

Tenka Academy

Step-by-step learning paths for your industry, inside the platform.

Explore the Academy