When a “fast-track process” takes forever to implement

Process improvement and innovation have become part of job responsibilities. And as the new in-house shall we say “technical solutions” team for the consumer marketing group I have a lot going on in the realm of process changes. Some are related to implementing to technology, some on manipulating current technology and others just trying to get things done faster, so for example, new products can get in front of the consumer faster and before the competition. Of the latter I am currently working on a team of people who is creating a new process for a business unit that has never sent digital communications.(Yes….I know it’s 2018).
This has come with its own headaches from trying to on board people who have never done email to understand their limitations and how it email works to also having this process be part of the “fast-track” process for email which is also being tested across different business units. It’s the perfect storm. Trying to stand up 2 new processes simultaneously has been difficult. One issue I can identify is that a lot of people don’t know who is responsible for what. The business unit requesting the change to digital don’t know what they’re responsible for getting to go through getting an email through our checks and controls. The project/campaign manager asks questions of my team that typically fall within their realm and is not changing in the new process. The validaton team, before the email goes out the door, are waffling and have been for weeks on what they need to verify that the email passes all inspections. It is a whole lot of finger-pointing that is taking the “fast-track process” months to implement.

What I think would help is having a swim lane document made specially for this business unit and the process that needs to be completed. My team has a swim lane document for once the communication is our responsibility. I have yet to see one for the overall process. I think this would help define who needs to do what before we move on to the next step in the process. Another thing I think would be helpful is a RACIVS chart. A version of a RACI chart the VS version includes Verify and Signatory action steps which my process models. Giving assignment at the different steps of the process and who is either an R.A.C.I.V.S would cut down on confusion of who is doing what. It would be very helpful for our validation team who until weeks ago were only considered consultant and informed where I feel they should have been accountable to up to their verifying step.

Anyone else run into process issues in a team decision environment?