| Course | GB560 Designing, Improving, and Implementing Processes |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 3 |
| Paper type | Current state map |
| Length | About 860 words, 6 pages double-spaced |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Purdue University Global |
| Program | MBA |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for GB560 Unit 3
Nine Documented Steps, Seventeen Observed: A Unit 3 Current State Map of an Appliance Returns Process
[Student Name]
Purdue University Global
GB560: Designing, Improving, and Implementing Processes
Unit 3 Current State Map
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
The seller, its returns center and every observation are composite and illustrative; the mapping method and sources cited are real.
Method
Forty returns were followed over two weeks, across both shifts, chosen by taking every 72nd dock scan so that no shift or product family was favored. Each was tracked from the carrier drop at the dock to the refund posting, with touch time timed at each step and waiting time taken from system timestamps and observation. Rother and Shook (1999) recommend walking the process and recording what is actually done, and every step on the map was seen at least five times.
The Lanes
Dock receiving: carrier drops and dock scans.
Unpacking and matching bench: opening boxes and matching each item to its order and return authorization.
Grading: inspecting, testing and grading each unit.
Customer service: keying refunds.
Inventory control: putting away sellable units and routing defects.
The Seventeen Steps
Touch minutes are shown for each step; median observed waits are shown between steps where they were longer than an hour.
1. Carrier drop at the dock. 2. Dock scan of the carrier label, 0.3 minutes.
Wait: about 29 hours while returns sit in bulk cartons before unpacking.
3. Stage the carton at the bench, 0.4. 4. Unpack the item, 1.6. 5. Look up the order, 0.8, by name or address when the box has no usable return authorization. 6. Match the item to its authorization, 0.6. 7. Print an internal label, 0.3. 8. Move the item to the grading queue, 0.4.
Wait: about 8 hours in the grading queue.
9. Grade, including power-on testing, 3.9. 10. Photograph damage on B- and C-grade units, about 0.6 on average. 11. Enter the grade in the warehouse system, 0.7.
Wait: about 11 hours for the 16:00 export, a batch point.
12. Export the day's grades to customer service as a file, with no touch time.
Wait: about 18 hours until customer service keys refunds the next morning, the second batch point.
13. Key the refund, 1.2. 14. Refund posts to the shopper's payment method.
15. Put away A-grade units to sellable stock, 0.6. 16. Route defects to the vendor claim shelf. 17. Assemble the vendor claim or move the unit to a liquidation pallet.
Touch time on the standard path totals about 11.4 minutes.
A typical return spends close to three days waiting for clocks and cartons, and under a quarter of an hour being handled.
Three Loops
The loops are drawn on the main map in heavier lines, because they are part of how the process runs.
No usable authorization. Four of the forty returns arrived without a usable authorization and were sent to a problem cage, where they waited five to nine days for a customer service agent to identify the order.
Disputed grade. Two units were regraded after inventory control questioned the first grade.
Refund corrected. One refund was corrected after the shopper called to say the amount was wrong.
What the Staff Said
Observation was paired with short conversations at each step, and three explanations recurred. Dock staff stage returns in bulk cartons because unpacking happens at a separate bench with its own crew, and the carton is the unit that moves between them. Graders said they wait for the 16:00 export because entering a grade does not trigger anything in the refund system; the file is the only link. Customer service agents key refunds in the morning because the file arrives after the refund team has left for the day. None of these explanations describes a choice anyone made about the shopper's wait. Each describes a handoff that made sense to the team on one side of it.
Comparison Strip
The written procedure lists nine steps: receive, unpack, verify authorization, grade, enter grade, refund, put away, file vendor claim and close. The observed process adds eight.
Workarounds, added to cope with the process: bulk carton staging, order lookup by name, the internal label, the 16:00 export hold and next-morning refund keying.
Necessary but undocumented: the move to the grading queue, damage photographs and separating defects onto the vendor claim shelf.
The five workarounds are where the waiting sits. Womack and Jones (2003) would classify all five as waste that the current arrangement makes necessary, as opposed to waste that can be removed immediately. Each was added for a reason, the export because the warehouse and refund systems are not connected and the label because the authorization barcode does not scan reliably, but together they turn a nine-step procedure into a seventeen-step process.
What the Map Shows
Spear and Bowen (1999) observe that well-run processes make every connection between steps direct and unambiguous, and the map shows the opposite at two points: a file passed between systems once a day, and a refund keyed by hand the next morning. The timing analysis in Unit 4 measures how much of the elapsed time those connections account for.
References
Rother, M., & Shook, J. (1999). Learning to see: Value stream mapping to add value and eliminate muda. Lean Enterprise Institute.
Spear, S., & Bowen, H. K. (1999). Decoding the DNA of the Toyota Production System. Harvard Business Review, 77(5), 96-106.
Womack, J. P., & Jones, D. T. (2003). Lean thinking: Banish waste and create wealth in your corporation (Rev. ed.). Free Press.
GB560 Unit 3 instructions, in plain terms
In GB560 Unit 3 you map the current state of your process as it actually runs. Explain your method: how many cases you followed, over what period, across which shifts and how they were chosen. Draw the process in swimlanes, with touch time on each step and waiting time between steps. Put loops that send work backward on the main map rather than in a note. Mark batch points where work waits for a clock or a file. Compare the documented procedure with what you observed, and classify each extra step. Record what staff say about why steps happen as they do. Close with what the map shows. Expect a two-page map and about three pages of notes, citing mapping sources in APA 7.
How the GB 560 Unit 3 example is put together
The method box describes forty returns taken every 72nd dock scan over two weeks, citing Rother and Shook on walking the process. Five lanes carry seventeen steps, from carrier drop through grading at 3.9 minutes to vendor claims, with waits for bulk cartons, the grading queue, the 16:00 export and next-morning keying. The highlighted sentence contrasts nearly three days of waiting with under a quarter hour of handling. Three loops appear in heavier lines. Staff explain each handoff, the comparison strip classifies the eight extra steps with Womack and Jones on waste, and Spear and Bowen frame the indirect connections at the two batch points.
GB560 Unit 3 rubric: what earns full points
Instructors grading a GB560 current state map look for a map that records what happens rather than what is written. A stated method, with case count and selection, earns points because graders often ask about it. Swimlanes with touch and wait times show measurement. Loops on the main map show honesty about how the process runs. Marking batch points shows insight into where time goes. A comparison with the documented procedure, classifying each extra step, shows analysis. Recording staff explanations shows the writer asked why. A closing reading of the map prepares the timing work. The mapping guide by Rother and Shook, the Womack and Jones lean text and the Spear and Bowen Toyota study form the reference list.
Common GB560 Unit 3 mistakes, and how to avoid them
Many GB560 Unit 3 maps redraw the written procedure, which hides the workarounds and waits where the real delay sits. Others leave loops off the main map to keep it tidy, making the process look better than it is. A frequent gap is time: a map without touch and wait figures cannot show where elapsed time goes. Some writers skip the method, so a reader cannot judge how many cases the map rests on. State the method, draw lanes with touch and wait times, keep loops visible, mark batch points, compare documented and observed steps, classify the extras and record staff explanations. Any drawing tool works; readability matters most.
Get a GB560 Unit 3 example written to your instructions
Attach whatever you have on the workflow being mapped this term, whether observations, timings or an existing procedure, along with the Unit 3 instructions and rubric. The map returned is built from how the work runs, loops and waits marked, compared with the written steps where they exist. That first custom sample is free, generally back in 24-48h. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Purdue University Global document.
More GB560 papers and MBA samples
- GB560 Unit 1: Discussion Board Post
- GB560 Unit 2: Process Requirements Memo
- GB560 Unit 4: Cycle Time Analysis
- GB560 Unit 5: Failure Mode Review
- GB560 Unit 6: Seminar Reflection
- GB560 Unit 7: Process Design Proposal
- GB560 Unit 8: Pilot Plan
- GB560 Unit 9: Control Plan
- GB560 Unit 10: Implementation Report
- GB550 Unit 3: Bond Valuation
- GB546 Unit 3: Labor Market Scan
- GB545 Unit 3: Market Position Memo
- GB542 Unit 3: Talent Segmentation Memo
GB560 Unit 3 questions, answered
How many cases should a current state map be based on?
Enough to see the paths the work actually takes, which usually means dozens rather than a handful. The sample follows forty returns over two weeks across both shifts. Fewer can work if the process is simple, but the map should state how many were observed and how they were chosen, since graders often ask about exactly that.
Should the loops really go on the main map?
Yes, because they are part of how the process runs, and leaving them off makes the map tidier and less true. In the sample, the problem-cage loop touched a small share of returns but held them for days, which the timing work in Unit 4 later confirms. Heavier lines keep the main path readable while the exceptions stay visible.
What software is used for the map?
Any tool that draws lanes and connectors works, including Visio, Lucidchart, draw.io or the shapes in PowerPoint. Some sections accept a clear hand drawing photographed at high resolution. The sample uses standard flowchart symbols in lanes. What graders check is readability and completeness, so the custom version follows the format your section specifies.
Where can I find a free GB560 Unit 3 sample paper?
This page carries a full GB560 Unit 3 current state map of a composite appliance returns process, with seventeen observed steps in five lanes, loops, batch points and APA 7 references.
What are the two batch points?
The 16:00 export, where finished grades wait for a daily file to customer service, and next-morning refund keying, where that file waits for agents to arrive. Neither involves any work.