Not every issue is a control failure.
Organizations often respond to errors by adding more approvals, reviews, and checks. This increases complexity without addressing the real issue - which is often a poorly designed process.
Understanding whether a failure is process-related or control-related is critical for sustainable improvement.
How to Tell the Difference
| Indicator | Process Failure | Control Failure |
|---|---|---|
| Steps unclear or duplicated | ✓ | - |
| Excessive handoffs | ✓ | - |
| Control exists but not followed | - | ✓ |
| Overrides without justification | - | ✓ |
| Frequent workarounds | ✓ | ✓ |
Real Case Snapshot – Adding Controls Didn’t Fix the Problem
Background
A professional services firm faced persistent delays in onboarding new clients. Each delay triggered management concern, and new approval steps and documentation requirements were introduced to “strengthen controls.”
Instead of improving, onboarding timelines worsened.
What Went Wrong
Over time:
Controls multiplied, but efficiency collapsed.
How It Was Uncovered
End-to-end process mapping showed:
The issue was not a control failure, it was a process design failure.
What Changed
Outcome
Key Lessons
Controls cannot compensate for poor process design. Fixing the process first ensures controls support efficiency instead of obstructing it.
NEXT WEEK – Week 7: Tech-Enabled Process Mapping
Next week, we explore how technology brings process maps to life through system enforcement, automation, and real-time monitoring.
Wednesday Deep Dive – Echoes of Truth is a weekly thought-leadership series by Crowe’s Risk Advisory – Forensic & Process Excellence Division. It delivers practical insights on forensic investigations, fraud risk, governance, internal controls and process excellence. Each edition draws from real-world engagements and global best practices to help organizations identify red flags, strengthen controls, optimize processes, and build resilient, transparent and high-performing operations.