Traced step by step, a service-move request crosses four desks in this MSHR 6610 Week 2 workflow map, with waiting time and working time kept apart on every lane. Searches like "mshr 6610 week 2 assignment example", "mshr6610 week 2 sample" and "mshr 6610 week 2 example" land here.
What a finished MSHR 6610 Week 2 workflow map looks like
One page of diagram and three of commentary. The map uses swimlanes for the caller, the front-line agent, the billing-certified agent, the field order desk and the customer information system. Each box records the step, who performs it, and an illustrative touch time; each arrow between lanes records how long the request typically sits before anyone picks it up. Rework loops are drawn as loops, most visibly the repeat call when a customer hears nothing for two days. Value stream mapping, as Rother and Shook popularized it, supplies the distinction the commentary leans on: the minutes spent working a request against the hours it spends waiting. The commentary then marks two handoffs where a people decision, cross-training front-line agents on move orders, would remove a queue rather than speed up a step.
How a MSHR 6610 Week 2 example is structured
Scope, lanes, steps, waits, loops, openings for HR. The scope line fixes one request type and one start and end point, because a map that tries to cover every call type becomes a picture of the whole building and explains nothing. Each lane stands for a role, never an individual, and the system of record gets its own lane since several waits belong to it. Steps carry touch time; arrows carry wait time, and the commentary totals both so a reader sees how small the working share is. Loops come next, each with its trigger and its cost in extra contacts. The closing section identifies where a staffing or skills decision would change the flow, and it separates those from waits that belong to software or policy, which HR cannot fix and does not claim.
One request, two fixed ends
A service move, from the caller's first sentence to the confirmed field order. Bounding the map this way keeps it readable and makes each total mean something.
Lanes by role, plus the system
Front-line agent, billing-certified agent, field order desk and the customer information system each get a lane. Several of the longest waits sit in the system's lane, not a person's.
Touch time on boxes, wait time on arrows
Every step shows minutes of work; every handoff shows hours of sitting. Totals at the foot of the page make the gap between the two impossible to miss.
The repeat call, drawn as a loop
Customers who hear nothing call back, and that second contact re-enters the front of the map. The loop carries its trigger and the extra agent minutes it consumes.
Where HR can change the flow
Cross-training front-line agents on move orders would remove one handoff and its queue. A nightly batch update would not respond to any staffing change, and the commentary says so.
Where marks go in MSHR 6610 Week 2
Graders open the map at the arrows. A diagram showing only activities, with no record of how long work sits between them, hides the one quantity the course wants measured, and it collects the lower share of the available points however tidy it looks. Scope is checked next: one request, bounded ends. The touch-time and wait-time totals earn a separate block, provided both are labeled as illustrative and the method for estimating them is stated. Loops are credited when their trigger is named. The closing section is short but heavily weighted, since separating people-fixable waits from system waits is the judgment the rest of the term builds on. A map that blames every delay on staffing, including a batch job that runs overnight, loses ground.
Get a MSHR 6610 Week 2 example written to your instructions
Attach the workflow map assignment, the grading rubric and the process your section names; where none is named, a service request at a made-up utility is mapped instead. Diagram and commentary arrive in 24 to 48 hours, free for a first request. The swimlanes can follow any template your instructor posts.
MSHR 6610 Week 2 questions, answered
Does the map need real process timings?
Not real ones, but honest ones. The sample labels each touch and wait time as illustrative and states how an analyst would measure it, such as timestamps in the ticket system or a week of observation. If your prompt supplies timings, use them exactly. If it does not, a reader will accept estimates that are labeled and explained far more readily than precise-looking numbers with no stated origin.
Why include a lane for a computer system?
Because work waits there too. In the sample, a move order sits in a batch queue overnight before the field desk can see it, and no hire or training program would shorten that wait. Giving the system a lane keeps the map honest about which delays belong to people. Your rubric probably rewards a map that stops HR from claiming fixes it cannot deliver.
Is value stream mapping required for this week?
Rarely by name. The sample borrows one idea from it, separating the time work is actively handled from the time it waits, because that idea turns a flowchart into an argument. Your course may teach swimlane diagrams or process maps under another label. Any of them serves, provided the finished map records waiting time and the commentary uses it.