Task-Boundary Mode
How task-instance boundaries are drawn from the event stream. Applies to every Task SoP, Step SoP, and Variants view.
Narrative
📝 Task SoP
Mined from 764 instances
Open Narrative Workspace
How 14 analysts execute this task across 319 cases — auto-generated Standard Operating Procedure with adherence scoring.
80.9
Avg Adherence Score (0-100)
Median 82.5 · Range 43.5–97.5
10.8 min
Avg Task Duration
0.4 min median
2.6
Avg Sub-Steps per Instance
63.8% have multiple sub-steps
0.1%
Reference Path Coverage
Instances following mined SoP exactly
Reference Baseline
0.1% of instances follow this exactly
Open Narrative Workspace — Mined SoP
The most common sub-step sequence observed across 814 task instances. Use the dropdown on the right to compare any deviation to this baseline.
1
Open Narrative Section
0.4s
0.1 edits
Veeva Safety
100%
2
Acrobat
0.0s
Acrobat
1%
3
Show More Details
0.1s
0.0 edits
Veeva Safety
5%
4
Microsoft Excel
0.0s
Microsoft Excel
0%
5
Open Action Items
0.0s
Veeva Safety
0%
6
Microsoft Excel
0.0s
Microsoft Excel
0%
7
Acrobat
0.0s
Acrobat
1%
8
Open System Section
0.0s
Veeva Safety
0%
9
Acrobat
0.0s
Acrobat
0%
10
Microsoft Outlook
0.0s
Microsoft Outlook
0%
Variant Explorer
Reference
Open Narrative Workspace Reference Path
1 instances · 1 analysts
This is the mined reference path — 1 instances across 1 analysts follow this exact sequence. Treat as the proposed Standard Operating Procedure for Open Narrative Workspace.
Genuine Complexity
Complex-Case Execution Path
295 instances · 11 analysts
· Δ adherence +3.6
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Show More Details
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Genuine Complexity — this sequence differs from the reference path (1 sub-steps vs 10 in reference) but shows no strong pain-point signals: adherence score 84.5 vs reference 80.9 (delta +3.6). Likely a legitimate case-complexity path — not an automation candidate, but worth cataloging.
Genuine Complexity
Complex-Case Execution Path
146 instances · 8 analysts
· Δ adherence +1.8
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
reference at this step: Acrobat
×
Show More Details
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Genuine Complexity — this sequence differs from the reference path (2 sub-steps vs 10 in reference) but shows no strong pain-point signals: adherence score 82.7 vs reference 80.9 (delta +1.8). Likely a legitimate case-complexity path — not an automation candidate, but worth cataloging.
Genuine Complexity
Complex-Case Execution Path
9 instances · 5 analysts
· Δ adherence +10.7
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Preview Japanese Narrative
reference at this step: Acrobat
×
Show More Details
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Genuine Complexity — this sequence differs from the reference path (2 sub-steps vs 10 in reference) but shows no strong pain-point signals: adherence score 91.7 vs reference 80.9 (delta +10.7). Likely a legitimate case-complexity path — not an automation candidate, but worth cataloging.
Cross-App Swivel
Cross-App Lookup to Microsoft Teams
9 instances · 4 analysts
· Δ adherence -8.4
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
reference at this step: Acrobat
3
Microsoft Teams
reference at this step: Show More Details
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Cross-App Swivel — 4 analysts pivot into Microsoft Teams during this task (0% of task time in non-primary apps, 33% of events outside the primary system). Pattern is consistent with data lookup or cross-referencing rather than a system defect — lighter-weight than a Silent Workaround.
Cross-App Swivel
Cross-App Lookup to Microsoft Word
8 instances · 4 analysts
· Δ adherence -12.5
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Microsoft Word
reference at this step: Acrobat
×
Show More Details
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Cross-App Swivel — 4 analysts pivot into Microsoft Word during this task (0% of task time in non-primary apps, 50% of events outside the primary system). Pattern is consistent with data lookup or cross-referencing rather than a system defect — lighter-weight than a Silent Workaround.
Genuine Complexity
Complex-Case Execution Path
6 instances · 4 analysts
· Δ adherence +10.3
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Preview English Narrative
reference at this step: Acrobat
×
Show More Details
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Genuine Complexity — this sequence differs from the reference path (2 sub-steps vs 10 in reference) but shows no strong pain-point signals: adherence score 91.2 vs reference 80.9 (delta +10.3). Likely a legitimate case-complexity path — not an automation candidate, but worth cataloging.
Reviewer Sweep
Reviewer Verification Pass
6 instances · 4 analysts
· Δ adherence +1.6
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
reference at this step: Acrobat
3
View Investigator Information
reference at this step: Show More Details
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Reviewer Sweep — a viewing-heavy pattern with 3.0 avg sub-steps and zero edits captured. Consistent with a downstream reviewer re-opening the task to verify earlier work rather than progressing new data. 4 analysts across 5 cases.
Reviewer Sweep
Reviewer Verification Pass
6 instances · 1 analysts
· Δ adherence +1.6
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
reference at this step: Acrobat
3
Open Study Section
reference at this step: Show More Details
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Reviewer Sweep — a viewing-heavy pattern with 3.0 avg sub-steps and zero edits captured. Consistent with a downstream reviewer re-opening the task to verify earlier work rather than progressing new data. 1 analysts across 6 cases.
Cross-App Swivel
Cross-App Lookup to Microsoft Outlook
6 instances · 1 analysts
· Δ adherence -8.4
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
reference at this step: Acrobat
3
Microsoft Outlook
reference at this step: Show More Details
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Cross-App Swivel — 1 analysts pivot into Microsoft Outlook during this task (0% of task time in non-primary apps, 33% of events outside the primary system). Pattern is consistent with data lookup or cross-referencing rather than a system defect — lighter-weight than a Silent Workaround.
Reviewer Sweep
Reviewer Verification Pass
5 instances · 3 analysts
· Δ adherence +1.6
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
reference at this step: Acrobat
3
View Migration Notice
reference at this step: Show More Details
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Reviewer Sweep — a viewing-heavy pattern with 3.0 avg sub-steps and zero edits captured. Consistent with a downstream reviewer re-opening the task to verify earlier work rather than progressing new data. 3 analysts across 5 cases.
Reviewer Sweep
Reviewer Verification Pass
5 instances · 3 analysts
· Δ adherence +1.6
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
reference at this step: Acrobat
3
Navigate to Cases
reference at this step: Show More Details
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Reviewer Sweep — a viewing-heavy pattern with 3.0 avg sub-steps and zero edits captured. Consistent with a downstream reviewer re-opening the task to verify earlier work rather than progressing new data. 3 analysts across 5 cases.
Reviewer Sweep
Reviewer Verification Pass
4 instances · 2 analysts
· Δ adherence +1.6
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
reference at this step: Acrobat
3
View Physician Report
reference at this step: Show More Details
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Reviewer Sweep — a viewing-heavy pattern with 3.0 avg sub-steps and zero edits captured. Consistent with a downstream reviewer re-opening the task to verify earlier work rather than progressing new data. 2 analysts across 4 cases.
Application Mix
Which applications analysts touch while executing this task, measured by event count and active dwell time.
| Application | Events | Event Share | Dwell Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Veeva Safety | 1,768 | 83.4% | 95.8% |
| Microsoft Word | 111 | 5.2% | 0.0% |
| Acrobat | 56 | 2.6% | 0.0% |
| Microsoft Teams | 50 | 2.4% | 0.0% |
| Microsoft Excel | 39 | 1.8% | 0.0% |
| Microsoft Outlook | 26 | 1.2% | 0.0% |
| ONENOTE | 16 | 0.8% | 0.0% |
| gpteal.merck.com | 6 | 0.3% | 0.0% |
| collaboration.merck.com | 5 | 0.2% | 0.0% |
| newtab | 4 | 0.2% | 0.0% |
Top Cross-App Transitions (within task instance)
Consecutive events that cross application boundaries within a task instance — the signal where swivel-chair patterns live.
| From | To | Transitions |
|---|---|---|
| Veeva Safety | Microsoft Word | 64 |
| Microsoft Word | Veeva Safety | 41 |
| Veeva Safety | Microsoft Teams | 34 |
| Veeva Safety | Microsoft Excel | 29 |
| Veeva Safety | Acrobat | 26 |
| Microsoft Word | Acrobat | 21 |
| Acrobat | Microsoft Word | 20 |
| Veeva Safety | Microsoft Outlook | 20 |
| Acrobat | Veeva Safety | 20 |
| Microsoft Teams | Veeva Safety | 14 |
On-Case Application Journey (±15 min around anchor)
Apps the same analyst touched on the same case within ±15 minutes of the task anchor. Captures work that spans task boundaries — the Veeva/Acrobat/Outlook/Word context surrounding the anchor click.
Case counts per app are not mutually exclusive — a case that touched Veeva AND Phobos in this window is counted in both rows. Overlap reflects real cross-app work, not double-counted cases.
Veeva Safety DOM 8,854 events 319 cases 100.5 min
DOM-level capture
Pyze JS captures every element interaction — button labels, field IDs, section panels.
pyzeClick
<span>
"Narrative"
860×
pyzeClick
<span>
"Complete"
835×
pyzeClick
<a>
"Show more"
603×
pyzeClick
<span>
"Adverse Events"
388×
pyzeClick
<span>
"Products"
235×
pyzeClick
<span>
"Submissions & Distributions"
205×
pyzeClick
<span>
"Documents"
205×
pyzeClick
<button>
"Save"
188×
Phobos DOM 1,127 events 157 cases 31.5 min
DOM-level capture
Pyze JS captures every element interaction — button labels, field IDs, section panels.
pyzeClick
<button>
"Proceed"
137×
pyzeClick
<button>
"Save Comments"
93×
pyzeClick
<button>
"Advance"
82×
pyzeClick
<button>
"Send to process"
69×
pyzeClick
<select>
"Select Compound · - sitagliptin phosphate Tablet (G"
49×
pyzeClick
<a>
"Cases"
45×
pyzeClick
<select>
"Select Attachment description · Legal · Legal Pre-Sca"
38×
pyzeClick
<a>
"Cases Coordinator"
34×
Microsoft Word Document 421 events 104 cases
Document-level capture
Task Mining captures the specific file open during work — file names often encode case context.
file
V-Narrative 543823 (English) (26544362_0_2_343646)
873×
file
V-Narrative 533164 (English) (26378749_0_4_342805)
659×
file
V-Narrative 533533 (English) (26384397_0_2_337752)
361×
file
V-Narrative 551229 (English) (26664901_0_1_349465)
326×
file
V-Narrative 549707 (English) (26645831_0_1_347236)
324×
file
V-Narrative 552979 (English) (26689105_0_2_348832)
307×
file
V-Narrative 542512 (English) (26522671_0_2_344761)
255×
file
V-Narrative 530932 (English) (26349278_0_2_339374)
248×
Acrobat App 256 events 62 cases
App-level capture
Only application name and dwell time available. Direct instrumentation would unlock deeper detail.
3,090 granular events captured, but no DOM, document, or message-level metadata is available for this application. Instrumenting this app directly with Pyze would unlock element-level detail.
Microsoft Teams App 197 events 77 cases
App-level capture
Only application name and dwell time available. Direct instrumentation would unlock deeper detail.
2,449 granular events captured, but no DOM, document, or message-level metadata is available for this application. Instrumenting this app directly with Pyze would unlock element-level detail.
Microsoft Excel Document 146 events 48 cases
Document-level capture
Task Mining captures the specific file open during work — file names often encode case context.
file
Case tracking list
867×
file
I-0000346875
161×
file
I-0000354334
153×
file
I-0000353124
142×
file
I-0000350382
132×
file
2352822 (v0.1)
131×
file
I-0000340178
109×
file
I-0000348506
95×
Microsoft Outlook Message 112 events 58 cases
Message-level capture
Task Mining captures email subjects. Case numbers frequently appear in the subject line.
collaboration.merck.com App 63 events 32 cases
App-level capture
Only application name and dwell time available. Direct instrumentation would unlock deeper detail.
ONENOTE Document 39 events 22 cases
Document-level capture
Task Mining captures the specific file open during work — file names often encode case context.
RIM Vault DOM 21 events 3 cases 0.2 min
DOM-level capture
Pyze JS captures every element interaction — button labels, field IDs, section panels.
Adherence Vectors
Each task instance is scored on four behavioral vectors. Lower values are more adherent to the mined SoP.
0.08
Swivel Rate
events in non-primary app / total
0.92
Zero-Edit Visit Rate
inspection-only clicks
1.11
Avg Revisit Depth
max repeats of any activity
0.00
Cross-App Time Share
time outside primary app
Meta Score Distribution
Instance count in each 10-point adherence bucket. Right-skewed = healthy execution; long left tail = concentrated pain points.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Top Concern Vector
Zero-Edit Visit Rate — current value 0.92
Investigate why analysts inspect-and-leave without editing — usually missing upstream data or unclear UI affordances.
Vector Contribution to Adherence Loss
Each vector's weighted contribution to lost adherence. The top row is your highest-leverage fix.
Zero-Edit Visit Rate
value 0.92
Investigate why analysts inspect-and-leave without editing — usually missing upstream data or unclear UI affordances.
Revisit Depth
value 1.11
High revisit depth = mid-flow rework. Trace which sub-step is being repeated; usually a data-readiness gap upstream.
Swivel Rate
value 0.08
Reduce cross-app hops by surfacing the secondary-app data inline (API integration or pre-fetched context panel).
Cross-App Time Share
value 0.00
Time outside primary app dominates this score. Identify which secondary app(s) and whether their function can be in-lined.
Lowest-Adherence Instances
The 5 task instances that scored lowest. These are the concrete cases worth investigating to understand the worst patterns.
| Case | Analyst | Score | Duration | Sub-Steps | Swivel | X-App | Revisit |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2324055 | Analyst 05 | 43.5 | 10.1m | 30 | 0.63 | 0.00 | 9 |
| 2351269 | Analyst 03 | 54.6 | 6.2m | 6 | 0.67 | 0.43 | 1 |
| 2347825 | Analyst 05 | 54.7 | 9.1m | 16 | 0.62 | 0.00 | 5 |
| 2314923 | Analyst 05 | 55.0 | 1.9m | 12 | 0.67 | 0.00 | 4 |
| 2334756 | Analyst 09 | 55.9 | 8.2m | 11 | 0.64 | 0.00 | 4 |
Users on This Task
14 analysts executed this task during the pilot. Scatter plots productivity (instances per active day) against adherence (meta score). Top-right = healthy high-volume analysts; bottom-right = firefighters; top-left = careful low-volume; bottom-left = struggling.
Adherence (meta score) →
Productivity (instances / active day) →
11
04
14
06
15
10
12
02
03
09
05
08
13
01
User-by-User Breakdown
Click any analyst to see their dominant sequence vs the reference SoP.
| Analyst | Instances | Inst / Day | Adherence | Weakest Vector | Swivel | X-App | Min | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ▸ | Analyst 11 | 1 | 1.0 | 97.5 | Revisit Depth | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 11's Dominant Sequence
— 1 of 1 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Preview English Narrative
· reference: Acrobat
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 04 | 176 | 13.5 | 85.9 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.00 | 0.00 | 51 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 04's Dominant Sequence
— 136 of 176 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
This analyst exhibits 25 distinct sequences across their 176 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 14 | 8 | 4.0 | 82.8 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.00 | 0.00 | 6 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 14's Dominant Sequence
— 5 of 8 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
This analyst exhibits 3 distinct sequences across their 8 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 06 | 3 | 1.5 | 82.5 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.00 | 0.00 | 35 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 06's Dominant Sequence
— 2 of 3 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
This analyst exhibits 2 distinct sequences across their 3 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 15 | 1 | 1.0 | 82.5 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.00 | 0.00 | 8 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 15's Dominant Sequence
— 1 of 1 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 10 | 38 | 3.8 | 81.4 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.02 | 0.00 | 192 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 10's Dominant Sequence
— 13 of 38 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
· reference: Acrobat
This analyst exhibits 16 distinct sequences across their 38 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 12 | 21 | 3.0 | 80.9 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.14 | 0.00 | 52 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 12's Dominant Sequence
— 5 of 21 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
This analyst exhibits 16 distinct sequences across their 21 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 02 | 38 | 3.2 | 80.9 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.07 | 0.00 | 1,780 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 02's Dominant Sequence
— 8 of 38 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
This analyst exhibits 24 distinct sequences across their 38 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 03 | 205 | 15.8 | 80.6 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.06 | 0.00 | 1,417 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 03's Dominant Sequence
— 104 of 205 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
This analyst exhibits 53 distinct sequences across their 205 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 09 | 252 | 15.8 | 79.1 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.12 | 0.00 | 5,072 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 09's Dominant Sequence
— 76 of 252 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
· reference: Acrobat
This analyst exhibits 125 distinct sequences across their 252 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 05 | 47 | 4.7 | 76.6 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.20 | 0.00 | 109 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 05's Dominant Sequence
— 5 of 47 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
This analyst exhibits 37 distinct sequences across their 47 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 08 | 3 | 1.5 | 73.5 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.30 | 0.00 | 5 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 08's Dominant Sequence
— 1 of 3 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
· reference: Acrobat
3
CelonisTaskMining.Client
· reference: Show More Details
4
milkeyway.merck.com
· reference: Microsoft Excel
This analyst exhibits 3 distinct sequences across their 3 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 13 | 15 | 1.9 | 72.3 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.37 | 0.00 | 83 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 13's Dominant Sequence
— 3 of 15 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
This analyst exhibits 12 distinct sequences across their 15 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 01 | 6 | 1.0 | 71.7 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.38 | 0.00 | 21 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 01's Dominant Sequence
— 1 of 6 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
· reference: Acrobat
3
Acrobat
· reference: Show More Details
4
Microsoft Teams
· reference: Microsoft Excel
This analyst exhibits 6 distinct sequences across their 6 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
80.9
Avg Adherence Score (0-100)
Median 82.5 · Range 39.2–97.5
11.2 min
Avg Task Duration
0.4 min median
2.8
Avg Sub-Steps per Instance
64.6% have multiple sub-steps
0.1%
Reference Path Coverage
Instances following mined SoP exactly
Reference Baseline
0.1% of instances follow this exactly
Open Narrative Workspace — Mined SoP
The most common sub-step sequence observed across 814 task instances. Use the dropdown on the right to compare any deviation to this baseline.
1
Open Narrative Section
0.4s
0.1 edits
Veeva Safety
100%
2
Acrobat
0.0s
Acrobat
1%
3
Show More Details
0.1s
0.0 edits
Veeva Safety
5%
4
Microsoft Excel
0.0s
Microsoft Excel
0%
5
Open Action Items
0.0s
Veeva Safety
0%
6
Microsoft Excel
0.0s
Microsoft Excel
0%
7
Acrobat
0.0s
Acrobat
1%
8
Open System Section
0.0s
Veeva Safety
0%
9
Acrobat
0.0s
Acrobat
0%
10
Microsoft Outlook
0.0s
Microsoft Outlook
0%
Variant Explorer
Reference
Open Narrative Workspace Reference Path
1 instances · 1 analysts
This is the mined reference path — 1 instances across 1 analysts follow this exact sequence. Treat as the proposed Standard Operating Procedure for Open Narrative Workspace.
Genuine Complexity
Complex-Case Execution Path
288 instances · 10 analysts
· Δ adherence +3.6
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Show More Details
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Genuine Complexity — this sequence differs from the reference path (1 sub-steps vs 10 in reference) but shows no strong pain-point signals: adherence score 84.5 vs reference 80.9 (delta +3.6). Likely a legitimate case-complexity path — not an automation candidate, but worth cataloging.
Genuine Complexity
Complex-Case Execution Path
138 instances · 8 analysts
· Δ adherence +1.8
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
reference at this step: Acrobat
×
Show More Details
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Genuine Complexity — this sequence differs from the reference path (2 sub-steps vs 10 in reference) but shows no strong pain-point signals: adherence score 82.7 vs reference 80.9 (delta +1.8). Likely a legitimate case-complexity path — not an automation candidate, but worth cataloging.
Genuine Complexity
Complex-Case Execution Path
9 instances · 5 analysts
· Δ adherence +10.8
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Preview Japanese Narrative
reference at this step: Acrobat
×
Show More Details
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Genuine Complexity — this sequence differs from the reference path (2 sub-steps vs 10 in reference) but shows no strong pain-point signals: adherence score 91.7 vs reference 80.9 (delta +10.8). Likely a legitimate case-complexity path — not an automation candidate, but worth cataloging.
Cross-App Swivel
Cross-App Lookup to Microsoft Teams
8 instances · 4 analysts
· Δ adherence -8.4
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
reference at this step: Acrobat
3
Microsoft Teams
reference at this step: Show More Details
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Cross-App Swivel — 4 analysts pivot into Microsoft Teams during this task (0% of task time in non-primary apps, 33% of events outside the primary system). Pattern is consistent with data lookup or cross-referencing rather than a system defect — lighter-weight than a Silent Workaround.
Cross-App Swivel
Cross-App Lookup to Microsoft Word
8 instances · 4 analysts
· Δ adherence -12.4
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Microsoft Word
reference at this step: Acrobat
×
Show More Details
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Cross-App Swivel — 4 analysts pivot into Microsoft Word during this task (0% of task time in non-primary apps, 50% of events outside the primary system). Pattern is consistent with data lookup or cross-referencing rather than a system defect — lighter-weight than a Silent Workaround.
Genuine Complexity
Complex-Case Execution Path
6 instances · 4 analysts
· Δ adherence +10.4
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Preview English Narrative
reference at this step: Acrobat
×
Show More Details
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Genuine Complexity — this sequence differs from the reference path (2 sub-steps vs 10 in reference) but shows no strong pain-point signals: adherence score 91.2 vs reference 80.9 (delta +10.4). Likely a legitimate case-complexity path — not an automation candidate, but worth cataloging.
Reviewer Sweep
Reviewer Verification Pass
6 instances · 4 analysts
· Δ adherence +1.6
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
reference at this step: Acrobat
3
View Investigator Information
reference at this step: Show More Details
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Reviewer Sweep — a viewing-heavy pattern with 3.0 avg sub-steps and zero edits captured. Consistent with a downstream reviewer re-opening the task to verify earlier work rather than progressing new data. 4 analysts across 6 cases.
Reviewer Sweep
Reviewer Verification Pass
6 instances · 1 analysts
· Δ adherence +1.6
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
reference at this step: Acrobat
3
Open Study Section
reference at this step: Show More Details
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Reviewer Sweep — a viewing-heavy pattern with 3.0 avg sub-steps and zero edits captured. Consistent with a downstream reviewer re-opening the task to verify earlier work rather than progressing new data. 1 analysts across 6 cases.
Cross-App Swivel
Cross-App Lookup to Microsoft Outlook
6 instances · 1 analysts
· Δ adherence -8.4
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
reference at this step: Acrobat
3
Microsoft Outlook
reference at this step: Show More Details
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Cross-App Swivel — 1 analysts pivot into Microsoft Outlook during this task (0% of task time in non-primary apps, 33% of events outside the primary system). Pattern is consistent with data lookup or cross-referencing rather than a system defect — lighter-weight than a Silent Workaround.
Reviewer Sweep
Reviewer Verification Pass
5 instances · 3 analysts
· Δ adherence +1.6
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
reference at this step: Acrobat
3
View Migration Notice
reference at this step: Show More Details
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Reviewer Sweep — a viewing-heavy pattern with 3.0 avg sub-steps and zero edits captured. Consistent with a downstream reviewer re-opening the task to verify earlier work rather than progressing new data. 3 analysts across 5 cases.
Reviewer Sweep
Reviewer Verification Pass
5 instances · 3 analysts
· Δ adherence +1.6
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
reference at this step: Acrobat
3
Navigate to Cases
reference at this step: Show More Details
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Reviewer Sweep — a viewing-heavy pattern with 3.0 avg sub-steps and zero edits captured. Consistent with a downstream reviewer re-opening the task to verify earlier work rather than progressing new data. 3 analysts across 5 cases.
Reviewer Sweep
Reviewer Verification Pass
4 instances · 2 analysts
· Δ adherence +1.6
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
reference at this step: Acrobat
3
View Physician Report
reference at this step: Show More Details
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Reviewer Sweep — a viewing-heavy pattern with 3.0 avg sub-steps and zero edits captured. Consistent with a downstream reviewer re-opening the task to verify earlier work rather than progressing new data. 2 analysts across 4 cases.
Application Mix
Which applications analysts touch while executing this task, measured by event count and active dwell time.
| Application | Events | Event Share | Dwell Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Veeva Safety | 1,854 | 82.8% | 96.0% |
| Microsoft Word | 123 | 5.5% | 0.0% |
| Acrobat | 71 | 3.2% | 0.0% |
| Microsoft Teams | 51 | 2.3% | 0.0% |
| Microsoft Excel | 40 | 1.8% | 0.0% |
| Microsoft Outlook | 26 | 1.2% | 0.0% |
| ONENOTE | 18 | 0.8% | 0.0% |
| gpteal.merck.com | 6 | 0.3% | 0.0% |
| newtab | 5 | 0.2% | 0.0% |
| collaboration.merck.com | 5 | 0.2% | 0.0% |
Top Cross-App Transitions (within task instance)
Consecutive events that cross application boundaries within a task instance — the signal where swivel-chair patterns live.
| From | To | Transitions |
|---|---|---|
| Veeva Safety | Microsoft Word | 67 |
| Microsoft Word | Veeva Safety | 42 |
| Veeva Safety | Microsoft Teams | 35 |
| Veeva Safety | Acrobat | 31 |
| Microsoft Word | Acrobat | 30 |
| Veeva Safety | Microsoft Excel | 29 |
| Acrobat | Microsoft Word | 27 |
| Acrobat | Veeva Safety | 24 |
| Veeva Safety | Microsoft Outlook | 20 |
| Microsoft Teams | Veeva Safety | 16 |
On-Case Application Journey (±15 min around anchor)
Apps the same analyst touched on the same case within ±15 minutes of the task anchor. Captures work that spans task boundaries — the Veeva/Acrobat/Outlook/Word context surrounding the anchor click.
Case counts per app are not mutually exclusive — a case that touched Veeva AND Phobos in this window is counted in both rows. Overlap reflects real cross-app work, not double-counted cases.
Veeva Safety DOM 8,854 events 319 cases 100.5 min
DOM-level capture
Pyze JS captures every element interaction — button labels, field IDs, section panels.
pyzeClick
<span>
"Narrative"
860×
pyzeClick
<span>
"Complete"
835×
pyzeClick
<a>
"Show more"
603×
pyzeClick
<span>
"Adverse Events"
388×
pyzeClick
<span>
"Products"
235×
pyzeClick
<span>
"Submissions & Distributions"
205×
pyzeClick
<span>
"Documents"
205×
pyzeClick
<button>
"Save"
188×
Phobos DOM 1,127 events 157 cases 31.5 min
DOM-level capture
Pyze JS captures every element interaction — button labels, field IDs, section panels.
pyzeClick
<button>
"Proceed"
137×
pyzeClick
<button>
"Save Comments"
93×
pyzeClick
<button>
"Advance"
82×
pyzeClick
<button>
"Send to process"
69×
pyzeClick
<select>
"Select Compound · - sitagliptin phosphate Tablet (G"
49×
pyzeClick
<a>
"Cases"
45×
pyzeClick
<select>
"Select Attachment description · Legal · Legal Pre-Sca"
38×
pyzeClick
<a>
"Cases Coordinator"
34×
Microsoft Word Document 421 events 104 cases
Document-level capture
Task Mining captures the specific file open during work — file names often encode case context.
file
V-Narrative 543823 (English) (26544362_0_2_343646)
873×
file
V-Narrative 533164 (English) (26378749_0_4_342805)
659×
file
V-Narrative 533533 (English) (26384397_0_2_337752)
361×
file
V-Narrative 551229 (English) (26664901_0_1_349465)
326×
file
V-Narrative 549707 (English) (26645831_0_1_347236)
324×
file
V-Narrative 552979 (English) (26689105_0_2_348832)
307×
file
V-Narrative 542512 (English) (26522671_0_2_344761)
255×
file
V-Narrative 530932 (English) (26349278_0_2_339374)
248×
Acrobat App 256 events 62 cases
App-level capture
Only application name and dwell time available. Direct instrumentation would unlock deeper detail.
3,090 granular events captured, but no DOM, document, or message-level metadata is available for this application. Instrumenting this app directly with Pyze would unlock element-level detail.
Microsoft Teams App 197 events 77 cases
App-level capture
Only application name and dwell time available. Direct instrumentation would unlock deeper detail.
2,449 granular events captured, but no DOM, document, or message-level metadata is available for this application. Instrumenting this app directly with Pyze would unlock element-level detail.
Microsoft Excel Document 146 events 48 cases
Document-level capture
Task Mining captures the specific file open during work — file names often encode case context.
file
Case tracking list
867×
file
I-0000346875
161×
file
I-0000354334
153×
file
I-0000353124
142×
file
I-0000350382
132×
file
2352822 (v0.1)
131×
file
I-0000340178
109×
file
I-0000348506
95×
Microsoft Outlook Message 112 events 58 cases
Message-level capture
Task Mining captures email subjects. Case numbers frequently appear in the subject line.
collaboration.merck.com App 63 events 32 cases
App-level capture
Only application name and dwell time available. Direct instrumentation would unlock deeper detail.
ONENOTE Document 39 events 22 cases
Document-level capture
Task Mining captures the specific file open during work — file names often encode case context.
RIM Vault DOM 21 events 3 cases 0.2 min
DOM-level capture
Pyze JS captures every element interaction — button labels, field IDs, section panels.
Adherence Vectors
Each task instance is scored on four behavioral vectors. Lower values are more adherent to the mined SoP.
0.09
Swivel Rate
events in non-primary app / total
0.92
Zero-Edit Visit Rate
inspection-only clicks
1.14
Avg Revisit Depth
max repeats of any activity
0.00
Cross-App Time Share
time outside primary app
Meta Score Distribution
Instance count in each 10-point adherence bucket. Right-skewed = healthy execution; long left tail = concentrated pain points.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Top Concern Vector
Zero-Edit Visit Rate — current value 0.92
Investigate why analysts inspect-and-leave without editing — usually missing upstream data or unclear UI affordances.
Vector Contribution to Adherence Loss
Each vector's weighted contribution to lost adherence. The top row is your highest-leverage fix.
Zero-Edit Visit Rate
value 0.92
Investigate why analysts inspect-and-leave without editing — usually missing upstream data or unclear UI affordances.
Revisit Depth
value 1.14
High revisit depth = mid-flow rework. Trace which sub-step is being repeated; usually a data-readiness gap upstream.
Swivel Rate
value 0.09
Reduce cross-app hops by surfacing the secondary-app data inline (API integration or pre-fetched context panel).
Cross-App Time Share
value 0.00
Time outside primary app dominates this score. Identify which secondary app(s) and whether their function can be in-lined.
Lowest-Adherence Instances
The 5 task instances that scored lowest. These are the concrete cases worth investigating to understand the worst patterns.
| Case | Analyst | Score | Duration | Sub-Steps | Swivel | X-App | Revisit |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2324055 | Analyst 05 | 39.2 | 33.6m | 54 | 0.70 | 0.00 | 19 |
| 2351269 | Analyst 03 | 54.6 | 6.2m | 6 | 0.67 | 0.43 | 1 |
| 2347825 | Analyst 05 | 54.7 | 9.1m | 16 | 0.62 | 0.00 | 5 |
| 2271348 | Analyst 09 | 55.0 | 16.6m | 15 | 0.67 | 0.00 | 4 |
| 2314923 | Analyst 05 | 55.0 | 1.9m | 12 | 0.67 | 0.00 | 4 |
Users on This Task
14 analysts executed this task during the pilot. Scatter plots productivity (instances per active day) against adherence (meta score). Top-right = healthy high-volume analysts; bottom-right = firefighters; top-left = careful low-volume; bottom-left = struggling.
Adherence (meta score) →
Productivity (instances / active day) →
11
15
04
14
06
10
12
02
03
09
05
08
13
01
User-by-User Breakdown
Click any analyst to see their dominant sequence vs the reference SoP.
| Analyst | Instances | Inst / Day | Adherence | Weakest Vector | Swivel | X-App | Min | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ▸ | Analyst 11 | 1 | 1.0 | 97.5 | Revisit Depth | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 11's Dominant Sequence
— 1 of 1 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Preview English Narrative
· reference: Acrobat
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 15 | 1 | 1.0 | 86.3 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.00 | 0.00 | 11 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 15's Dominant Sequence
— 1 of 1 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Generate Final Review Form
· reference: Acrobat
3
Add Item
· reference: Show More Details
4
Create New Item
· reference: Microsoft Excel
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 04 | 176 | 13.5 | 86.0 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.00 | 0.00 | 78 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 04's Dominant Sequence
— 134 of 176 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
This analyst exhibits 28 distinct sequences across their 176 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 14 | 8 | 4.0 | 83.1 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.00 | 0.00 | 38 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 14's Dominant Sequence
— 5 of 8 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
This analyst exhibits 4 distinct sequences across their 8 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 06 | 3 | 1.5 | 82.5 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.00 | 0.00 | 35 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 06's Dominant Sequence
— 2 of 3 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
This analyst exhibits 2 distinct sequences across their 3 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 10 | 38 | 3.8 | 81.4 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.02 | 0.00 | 222 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 10's Dominant Sequence
— 12 of 38 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
· reference: Acrobat
This analyst exhibits 18 distinct sequences across their 38 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 12 | 21 | 3.0 | 80.9 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.14 | 0.00 | 57 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 12's Dominant Sequence
— 5 of 21 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
This analyst exhibits 16 distinct sequences across their 21 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 02 | 38 | 3.2 | 80.9 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.07 | 0.00 | 1,780 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 02's Dominant Sequence
— 8 of 38 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
This analyst exhibits 24 distinct sequences across their 38 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 03 | 205 | 15.8 | 80.6 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.06 | 0.00 | 1,450 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 03's Dominant Sequence
— 103 of 205 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
This analyst exhibits 57 distinct sequences across their 205 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 09 | 252 | 15.8 | 78.9 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.13 | 0.00 | 5,174 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 09's Dominant Sequence
— 74 of 252 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
· reference: Acrobat
This analyst exhibits 130 distinct sequences across their 252 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 05 | 47 | 4.7 | 76.5 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.20 | 0.00 | 142 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 05's Dominant Sequence
— 5 of 47 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
This analyst exhibits 37 distinct sequences across their 47 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 08 | 3 | 1.5 | 73.5 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.30 | 0.00 | 5 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 08's Dominant Sequence
— 1 of 3 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
· reference: Acrobat
3
CelonisTaskMining.Client
· reference: Show More Details
4
milkeyway.merck.com
· reference: Microsoft Excel
This analyst exhibits 3 distinct sequences across their 3 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 13 | 15 | 1.9 | 72.3 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.37 | 0.00 | 83 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 13's Dominant Sequence
— 3 of 15 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
This analyst exhibits 12 distinct sequences across their 15 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 01 | 6 | 1.0 | 71.7 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.38 | 0.00 | 21 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 01's Dominant Sequence
— 1 of 6 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
· reference: Acrobat
3
Acrobat
· reference: Show More Details
4
Microsoft Teams
· reference: Microsoft Excel
This analyst exhibits 6 distinct sequences across their 6 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
80.9
Avg Adherence Score (0-100)
Median 82.5 · Range 43.5–97.5
11.5 min
Avg Task Duration
0.4 min median
2.8
Avg Sub-Steps per Instance
62.8% have multiple sub-steps
0.1%
Reference Path Coverage
Instances following mined SoP exactly
Reference Baseline
0.1% of instances follow this exactly
Open Narrative Workspace — Mined SoP
The most common sub-step sequence observed across 769 task instances. Use the dropdown on the right to compare any deviation to this baseline.
1
Open Narrative Section
0.4s
0.1 edits
Veeva Safety
100%
2
Acrobat
0.0s
Acrobat
1%
3
Show More Details
0.1s
0.0 edits
Veeva Safety
5%
4
Microsoft Excel
0.0s
Microsoft Excel
0%
5
Open Action Items
0.0s
Veeva Safety
0%
6
Microsoft Excel
0.0s
Microsoft Excel
0%
7
Acrobat
0.0s
Acrobat
1%
8
Open System Section
0.0s
Veeva Safety
0%
9
Acrobat
0.0s
Acrobat
0%
10
Microsoft Outlook
0.0s
Microsoft Outlook
0%
Variant Explorer
Reference
Open Narrative Workspace Reference Path
1 instances · 1 analysts
This is the mined reference path — 1 instances across 1 analysts follow this exact sequence. Treat as the proposed Standard Operating Procedure for Open Narrative Workspace.
Genuine Complexity
Complex-Case Execution Path
286 instances · 11 analysts
· Δ adherence +3.7
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Show More Details
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Genuine Complexity — this sequence differs from the reference path (1 sub-steps vs 10 in reference) but shows no strong pain-point signals: adherence score 84.5 vs reference 80.9 (delta +3.7). Likely a legitimate case-complexity path — not an automation candidate, but worth cataloging.
Genuine Complexity
Complex-Case Execution Path
127 instances · 8 analysts
· Δ adherence +1.8
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
reference at this step: Acrobat
×
Show More Details
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Genuine Complexity — this sequence differs from the reference path (2 sub-steps vs 10 in reference) but shows no strong pain-point signals: adherence score 82.7 vs reference 80.9 (delta +1.8). Likely a legitimate case-complexity path — not an automation candidate, but worth cataloging.
Genuine Complexity
Complex-Case Execution Path
9 instances · 5 analysts
· Δ adherence +10.8
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Preview Japanese Narrative
reference at this step: Acrobat
×
Show More Details
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Genuine Complexity — this sequence differs from the reference path (2 sub-steps vs 10 in reference) but shows no strong pain-point signals: adherence score 91.7 vs reference 80.9 (delta +10.8). Likely a legitimate case-complexity path — not an automation candidate, but worth cataloging.
Cross-App Swivel
Cross-App Lookup to Microsoft Word
8 instances · 4 analysts
· Δ adherence -12.5
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Microsoft Word
reference at this step: Acrobat
×
Show More Details
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Cross-App Swivel — 4 analysts pivot into Microsoft Word during this task (0% of task time in non-primary apps, 50% of events outside the primary system). Pattern is consistent with data lookup or cross-referencing rather than a system defect — lighter-weight than a Silent Workaround.
Genuine Complexity
Complex-Case Execution Path
6 instances · 4 analysts
· Δ adherence +10.4
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Preview English Narrative
reference at this step: Acrobat
×
Show More Details
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Genuine Complexity — this sequence differs from the reference path (2 sub-steps vs 10 in reference) but shows no strong pain-point signals: adherence score 91.2 vs reference 80.9 (delta +10.4). Likely a legitimate case-complexity path — not an automation candidate, but worth cataloging.
Reviewer Sweep
Reviewer Verification Pass
6 instances · 4 analysts
· Δ adherence +1.6
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
reference at this step: Acrobat
3
View Investigator Information
reference at this step: Show More Details
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Reviewer Sweep — a viewing-heavy pattern with 3.0 avg sub-steps and zero edits captured. Consistent with a downstream reviewer re-opening the task to verify earlier work rather than progressing new data. 4 analysts across 5 cases.
Cross-App Swivel
Cross-App Lookup to Microsoft Teams
6 instances · 4 analysts
· Δ adherence -8.4
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
reference at this step: Acrobat
3
Microsoft Teams
reference at this step: Show More Details
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Cross-App Swivel — 4 analysts pivot into Microsoft Teams during this task (0% of task time in non-primary apps, 33% of events outside the primary system). Pattern is consistent with data lookup or cross-referencing rather than a system defect — lighter-weight than a Silent Workaround.
Reviewer Sweep
Reviewer Verification Pass
6 instances · 1 analysts
· Δ adherence +1.6
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
reference at this step: Acrobat
3
Open Study Section
reference at this step: Show More Details
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Reviewer Sweep — a viewing-heavy pattern with 3.0 avg sub-steps and zero edits captured. Consistent with a downstream reviewer re-opening the task to verify earlier work rather than progressing new data. 1 analysts across 6 cases.
Reviewer Sweep
Reviewer Verification Pass
5 instances · 3 analysts
· Δ adherence +1.6
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
reference at this step: Acrobat
3
View Migration Notice
reference at this step: Show More Details
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Reviewer Sweep — a viewing-heavy pattern with 3.0 avg sub-steps and zero edits captured. Consistent with a downstream reviewer re-opening the task to verify earlier work rather than progressing new data. 3 analysts across 5 cases.
Cross-App Swivel
Cross-App Lookup to Microsoft Outlook
5 instances · 1 analysts
· Δ adherence -8.4
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
reference at this step: Acrobat
3
Microsoft Outlook
reference at this step: Show More Details
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Cross-App Swivel — 1 analysts pivot into Microsoft Outlook during this task (0% of task time in non-primary apps, 33% of events outside the primary system). Pattern is consistent with data lookup or cross-referencing rather than a system defect — lighter-weight than a Silent Workaround.
Reviewer Sweep
Reviewer Verification Pass
4 instances · 2 analysts
· Δ adherence +1.6
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
reference at this step: Acrobat
3
View Physician Report
reference at this step: Show More Details
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Reviewer Sweep — a viewing-heavy pattern with 3.0 avg sub-steps and zero edits captured. Consistent with a downstream reviewer re-opening the task to verify earlier work rather than progressing new data. 2 analysts across 4 cases.
Reviewer Sweep
Reviewer Verification Pass
4 instances · 1 analysts
· Δ adherence +1.6
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
reference at this step: Acrobat
3
View Business Partner Information
reference at this step: Show More Details
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Reviewer Sweep — a viewing-heavy pattern with 3.0 avg sub-steps and zero edits captured. Consistent with a downstream reviewer re-opening the task to verify earlier work rather than progressing new data. 1 analysts across 4 cases.
Application Mix
Which applications analysts touch while executing this task, measured by event count and active dwell time.
| Application | Events | Event Share | Dwell Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Veeva Safety | 1,768 | 83.4% | 95.8% |
| Microsoft Word | 111 | 5.2% | 0.0% |
| Acrobat | 56 | 2.6% | 0.0% |
| Microsoft Teams | 50 | 2.4% | 0.0% |
| Microsoft Excel | 39 | 1.8% | 0.0% |
| Microsoft Outlook | 26 | 1.2% | 0.0% |
| ONENOTE | 16 | 0.8% | 0.0% |
| gpteal.merck.com | 6 | 0.3% | 0.0% |
| collaboration.merck.com | 5 | 0.2% | 0.0% |
| newtab | 4 | 0.2% | 0.0% |
Top Cross-App Transitions (within task instance)
Consecutive events that cross application boundaries within a task instance — the signal where swivel-chair patterns live.
| From | To | Transitions |
|---|---|---|
| Veeva Safety | Microsoft Word | 64 |
| Microsoft Word | Veeva Safety | 44 |
| Veeva Safety | Microsoft Teams | 34 |
| Veeva Safety | Microsoft Excel | 29 |
| Veeva Safety | Acrobat | 26 |
| Microsoft Word | Acrobat | 21 |
| Acrobat | Veeva Safety | 21 |
| Veeva Safety | Microsoft Outlook | 20 |
| Acrobat | Microsoft Word | 20 |
| Microsoft Teams | Veeva Safety | 18 |
On-Case Application Journey (±15 min around anchor)
Apps the same analyst touched on the same case within ±15 minutes of the task anchor. Captures work that spans task boundaries — the Veeva/Acrobat/Outlook/Word context surrounding the anchor click.
Case counts per app are not mutually exclusive — a case that touched Veeva AND Phobos in this window is counted in both rows. Overlap reflects real cross-app work, not double-counted cases.
Veeva Safety DOM 8,854 events 319 cases 100.5 min
DOM-level capture
Pyze JS captures every element interaction — button labels, field IDs, section panels.
pyzeClick
<span>
"Narrative"
860×
pyzeClick
<span>
"Complete"
835×
pyzeClick
<a>
"Show more"
603×
pyzeClick
<span>
"Adverse Events"
388×
pyzeClick
<span>
"Products"
235×
pyzeClick
<span>
"Documents"
205×
pyzeClick
<span>
"Submissions & Distributions"
205×
pyzeClick
<button>
"Save"
188×
Phobos DOM 1,127 events 157 cases 31.5 min
DOM-level capture
Pyze JS captures every element interaction — button labels, field IDs, section panels.
pyzeClick
<button>
"Proceed"
137×
pyzeClick
<button>
"Save Comments"
93×
pyzeClick
<button>
"Advance"
82×
pyzeClick
<button>
"Send to process"
69×
pyzeClick
<select>
"Select Compound · - sitagliptin phosphate Tablet (G"
49×
pyzeClick
<a>
"Cases"
45×
pyzeClick
<select>
"Select Attachment description · Legal · Legal Pre-Sca"
38×
pyzeClick
<a>
"Cases Coordinator"
34×
Microsoft Word Document 421 events 104 cases
Document-level capture
Task Mining captures the specific file open during work — file names often encode case context.
file
V-Narrative 543823 (English) (26544362_0_2_343646)
873×
file
V-Narrative 533164 (English) (26378749_0_4_342805)
659×
file
V-Narrative 533533 (English) (26384397_0_2_337752)
361×
file
V-Narrative 551229 (English) (26664901_0_1_349465)
326×
file
V-Narrative 549707 (English) (26645831_0_1_347236)
324×
file
V-Narrative 552979 (English) (26689105_0_2_348832)
307×
file
V-Narrative 542512 (English) (26522671_0_2_344761)
255×
file
V-Narrative 530932 (English) (26349278_0_2_339374)
248×
Acrobat App 256 events 62 cases
App-level capture
Only application name and dwell time available. Direct instrumentation would unlock deeper detail.
3,090 granular events captured, but no DOM, document, or message-level metadata is available for this application. Instrumenting this app directly with Pyze would unlock element-level detail.
Microsoft Teams App 197 events 77 cases
App-level capture
Only application name and dwell time available. Direct instrumentation would unlock deeper detail.
2,449 granular events captured, but no DOM, document, or message-level metadata is available for this application. Instrumenting this app directly with Pyze would unlock element-level detail.
Microsoft Excel Document 146 events 48 cases
Document-level capture
Task Mining captures the specific file open during work — file names often encode case context.
file
Case tracking list
867×
file
I-0000346875
161×
file
I-0000354334
153×
file
I-0000353124
142×
file
I-0000350382
132×
file
2352822 (v0.1)
131×
file
I-0000340178
109×
file
I-0000348506
95×
Microsoft Outlook Message 112 events 58 cases
Message-level capture
Task Mining captures email subjects. Case numbers frequently appear in the subject line.
collaboration.merck.com App 63 events 32 cases
App-level capture
Only application name and dwell time available. Direct instrumentation would unlock deeper detail.
ONENOTE Document 39 events 22 cases
Document-level capture
Task Mining captures the specific file open during work — file names often encode case context.
RIM Vault DOM 21 events 3 cases 0.2 min
DOM-level capture
Pyze JS captures every element interaction — button labels, field IDs, section panels.
Adherence Vectors
Each task instance is scored on four behavioral vectors. Lower values are more adherent to the mined SoP.
0.08
Swivel Rate
events in non-primary app / total
0.91
Zero-Edit Visit Rate
inspection-only clicks
1.17
Avg Revisit Depth
max repeats of any activity
0.00
Cross-App Time Share
time outside primary app
Meta Score Distribution
Instance count in each 10-point adherence bucket. Right-skewed = healthy execution; long left tail = concentrated pain points.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Top Concern Vector
Zero-Edit Visit Rate — current value 0.91
Investigate why analysts inspect-and-leave without editing — usually missing upstream data or unclear UI affordances.
Vector Contribution to Adherence Loss
Each vector's weighted contribution to lost adherence. The top row is your highest-leverage fix.
Zero-Edit Visit Rate
value 0.91
Investigate why analysts inspect-and-leave without editing — usually missing upstream data or unclear UI affordances.
Revisit Depth
value 1.17
High revisit depth = mid-flow rework. Trace which sub-step is being repeated; usually a data-readiness gap upstream.
Swivel Rate
value 0.08
Reduce cross-app hops by surfacing the secondary-app data inline (API integration or pre-fetched context panel).
Cross-App Time Share
value 0.00
Time outside primary app dominates this score. Identify which secondary app(s) and whether their function can be in-lined.
Lowest-Adherence Instances
The 5 task instances that scored lowest. These are the concrete cases worth investigating to understand the worst patterns.
| Case | Analyst | Score | Duration | Sub-Steps | Swivel | X-App | Revisit |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2324055 | Analyst 05 | 43.5 | 10.1m | 30 | 0.63 | 0.00 | 9 |
| 2351269 | Analyst 03 | 54.6 | 6.2m | 6 | 0.67 | 0.43 | 1 |
| 2314923 | Analyst 05 | 55.0 | 1.9m | 12 | 0.67 | 0.00 | 4 |
| 2347825 | Analyst 05 | 55.6 | 12.4m | 24 | 0.50 | 0.00 | 6 |
| 2334756 | Analyst 09 | 55.9 | 8.2m | 11 | 0.64 | 0.00 | 4 |
Users on This Task
14 analysts executed this task during the pilot. Scatter plots productivity (instances per active day) against adherence (meta score). Top-right = healthy high-volume analysts; bottom-right = firefighters; top-left = careful low-volume; bottom-left = struggling.
Adherence (meta score) →
Productivity (instances / active day) →
11
04
14
06
15
10
12
02
03
09
05
08
13
01
User-by-User Breakdown
Click any analyst to see their dominant sequence vs the reference SoP.
| Analyst | Instances | Inst / Day | Adherence | Weakest Vector | Swivel | X-App | Min | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ▸ | Analyst 11 | 1 | 1.0 | 97.5 | Revisit Depth | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 11's Dominant Sequence
— 1 of 1 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Preview English Narrative
· reference: Acrobat
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 04 | 173 | 13.3 | 85.9 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.00 | 0.00 | 54 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 04's Dominant Sequence
— 134 of 173 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
This analyst exhibits 26 distinct sequences across their 173 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 14 | 8 | 4.0 | 82.8 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.00 | 0.00 | 6 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 14's Dominant Sequence
— 5 of 8 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
This analyst exhibits 3 distinct sequences across their 8 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 06 | 3 | 1.5 | 82.5 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.00 | 0.00 | 35 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 06's Dominant Sequence
— 2 of 3 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
This analyst exhibits 2 distinct sequences across their 3 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 15 | 1 | 1.0 | 82.5 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.00 | 0.00 | 8 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 15's Dominant Sequence
— 1 of 1 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 10 | 37 | 3.7 | 81.3 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.02 | 0.00 | 194 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 10's Dominant Sequence
— 12 of 37 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
· reference: Acrobat
This analyst exhibits 16 distinct sequences across their 37 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 12 | 21 | 3.0 | 80.9 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.14 | 0.00 | 52 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 12's Dominant Sequence
— 5 of 21 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
This analyst exhibits 16 distinct sequences across their 21 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 02 | 38 | 3.2 | 80.9 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.07 | 0.00 | 1,780 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 02's Dominant Sequence
— 8 of 38 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
This analyst exhibits 24 distinct sequences across their 38 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 03 | 192 | 14.8 | 80.5 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.06 | 0.00 | 1,425 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 03's Dominant Sequence
— 98 of 192 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
This analyst exhibits 54 distinct sequences across their 192 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 09 | 229 | 14.3 | 78.9 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.12 | 0.00 | 5,057 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 09's Dominant Sequence
— 62 of 229 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
· reference: Acrobat
This analyst exhibits 122 distinct sequences across their 229 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 05 | 42 | 4.2 | 76.6 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.19 | 0.00 | 112 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 05's Dominant Sequence
— 4 of 42 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
· reference: Acrobat
This analyst exhibits 34 distinct sequences across their 42 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 08 | 3 | 1.5 | 73.5 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.30 | 0.00 | 5 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 08's Dominant Sequence
— 1 of 3 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
· reference: Acrobat
3
CelonisTaskMining.Client
· reference: Show More Details
4
milkeyway.merck.com
· reference: Microsoft Excel
This analyst exhibits 3 distinct sequences across their 3 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 13 | 15 | 1.9 | 72.3 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.37 | 0.00 | 83 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 13's Dominant Sequence
— 3 of 15 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
This analyst exhibits 12 distinct sequences across their 15 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 01 | 6 | 1.0 | 71.7 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.38 | 0.00 | 21 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 01's Dominant Sequence
— 1 of 6 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
· reference: Acrobat
3
Acrobat
· reference: Show More Details
4
Microsoft Teams
· reference: Microsoft Excel
This analyst exhibits 6 distinct sequences across their 6 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
80.9
Avg Adherence Score (0-100)
Median 82.5 · Range 40.4–97.5
11.9 min
Avg Task Duration
0.4 min median
2.9
Avg Sub-Steps per Instance
63.6% have multiple sub-steps
0.1%
Reference Path Coverage
Instances following mined SoP exactly
Reference Baseline
0.1% of instances follow this exactly
Open Narrative Workspace — Mined SoP
The most common sub-step sequence observed across 764 task instances. Use the dropdown on the right to compare any deviation to this baseline.
1
Open Narrative Section
0.4s
0.1 edits
Veeva Safety
100%
2
Acrobat
0.0s
Acrobat
1%
3
Show More Details
0.1s
0.0 edits
Veeva Safety
5%
4
Microsoft Excel
0.0s
Microsoft Excel
0%
5
Open Action Items
0.0s
Veeva Safety
0%
6
Microsoft Excel
0.0s
Microsoft Excel
0%
7
Acrobat
0.0s
Acrobat
1%
8
Open System Section
0.0s
Veeva Safety
0%
9
Acrobat
0.0s
Acrobat
0%
10
Microsoft Outlook
0.0s
Microsoft Outlook
0%
Variant Explorer
Reference
Open Narrative Workspace Reference Path
1 instances · 1 analysts
This is the mined reference path — 1 instances across 1 analysts follow this exact sequence. Treat as the proposed Standard Operating Procedure for Open Narrative Workspace.
Genuine Complexity
Complex-Case Execution Path
278 instances · 10 analysts
· Δ adherence +3.8
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Show More Details
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Genuine Complexity — this sequence differs from the reference path (1 sub-steps vs 10 in reference) but shows no strong pain-point signals: adherence score 84.6 vs reference 80.9 (delta +3.8). Likely a legitimate case-complexity path — not an automation candidate, but worth cataloging.
Linked Remediation Opportunities
Genuine Complexity
Complex-Case Execution Path
118 instances · 8 analysts
· Δ adherence +1.8
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
reference at this step: Acrobat
×
Show More Details
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Genuine Complexity — this sequence differs from the reference path (2 sub-steps vs 10 in reference) but shows no strong pain-point signals: adherence score 82.7 vs reference 80.9 (delta +1.8). Likely a legitimate case-complexity path — not an automation candidate, but worth cataloging.
Linked Remediation Opportunities
Genuine Complexity
Complex-Case Execution Path
9 instances · 5 analysts
· Δ adherence +10.8
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Preview Japanese Narrative
reference at this step: Acrobat
×
Show More Details
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Genuine Complexity — this sequence differs from the reference path (2 sub-steps vs 10 in reference) but shows no strong pain-point signals: adherence score 91.7 vs reference 80.9 (delta +10.8). Likely a legitimate case-complexity path — not an automation candidate, but worth cataloging.
Linked Remediation Opportunities
Cross-App Swivel
Cross-App Lookup to Microsoft Word
8 instances · 4 analysts
· Δ adherence -12.4
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Microsoft Word
reference at this step: Acrobat
×
Show More Details
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Cross-App Swivel — 4 analysts pivot into Microsoft Word during this task (0% of task time in non-primary apps, 50% of events outside the primary system). Pattern is consistent with data lookup or cross-referencing rather than a system defect — lighter-weight than a Silent Workaround.
Genuine Complexity
Complex-Case Execution Path
6 instances · 4 analysts
· Δ adherence +10.4
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Preview English Narrative
reference at this step: Acrobat
×
Show More Details
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Genuine Complexity — this sequence differs from the reference path (2 sub-steps vs 10 in reference) but shows no strong pain-point signals: adherence score 91.2 vs reference 80.9 (delta +10.4). Likely a legitimate case-complexity path — not an automation candidate, but worth cataloging.
Linked Remediation Opportunities
Reviewer Sweep
Reviewer Verification Pass
6 instances · 4 analysts
· Δ adherence +1.6
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
reference at this step: Acrobat
3
View Investigator Information
reference at this step: Show More Details
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Reviewer Sweep — a viewing-heavy pattern with 3.0 avg sub-steps and zero edits captured. Consistent with a downstream reviewer re-opening the task to verify earlier work rather than progressing new data. 4 analysts across 5 cases.
Reviewer Sweep
Reviewer Verification Pass
6 instances · 1 analysts
· Δ adherence +1.6
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
reference at this step: Acrobat
3
Open Study Section
reference at this step: Show More Details
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Reviewer Sweep — a viewing-heavy pattern with 3.0 avg sub-steps and zero edits captured. Consistent with a downstream reviewer re-opening the task to verify earlier work rather than progressing new data. 1 analysts across 6 cases.
Reviewer Sweep
Reviewer Verification Pass
5 instances · 3 analysts
· Δ adherence +1.6
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
reference at this step: Acrobat
3
View Migration Notice
reference at this step: Show More Details
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Reviewer Sweep — a viewing-heavy pattern with 3.0 avg sub-steps and zero edits captured. Consistent with a downstream reviewer re-opening the task to verify earlier work rather than progressing new data. 3 analysts across 5 cases.
Cross-App Swivel
Cross-App Lookup to Microsoft Teams
5 instances · 4 analysts
· Δ adherence -8.4
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
reference at this step: Acrobat
3
Microsoft Teams
reference at this step: Show More Details
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Cross-App Swivel — 4 analysts pivot into Microsoft Teams during this task (0% of task time in non-primary apps, 33% of events outside the primary system). Pattern is consistent with data lookup or cross-referencing rather than a system defect — lighter-weight than a Silent Workaround.
Cross-App Swivel
Cross-App Lookup to Microsoft Outlook
5 instances · 1 analysts
· Δ adherence -8.4
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
reference at this step: Acrobat
3
Microsoft Outlook
reference at this step: Show More Details
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Cross-App Swivel — 1 analysts pivot into Microsoft Outlook during this task (0% of task time in non-primary apps, 33% of events outside the primary system). Pattern is consistent with data lookup or cross-referencing rather than a system defect — lighter-weight than a Silent Workaround.
Reviewer Sweep
Reviewer Verification Pass
4 instances · 2 analysts
· Δ adherence +1.6
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
reference at this step: Acrobat
3
View Physician Report
reference at this step: Show More Details
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Reviewer Sweep — a viewing-heavy pattern with 3.0 avg sub-steps and zero edits captured. Consistent with a downstream reviewer re-opening the task to verify earlier work rather than progressing new data. 2 analysts across 4 cases.
Reviewer Sweep
Reviewer Verification Pass
4 instances · 1 analysts
· Δ adherence +1.6
Observed Sequence (vs Reference SoP on left)
differs from reference
matches reference
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
reference at this step: Acrobat
3
View Spontaneous Report
reference at this step: Show More Details
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open Action Items
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Excel
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Open System Section
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Acrobat
skipped — this reference step was not executed
×
Microsoft Outlook
skipped — this reference step was not executed
Reviewer Sweep — a viewing-heavy pattern with 3.0 avg sub-steps and zero edits captured. Consistent with a downstream reviewer re-opening the task to verify earlier work rather than progressing new data. 1 analysts across 4 cases.
Application Mix
Which applications analysts touch while executing this task, measured by event count and active dwell time.
| Application | Events | Event Share | Dwell Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Veeva Safety | 1,854 | 82.8% | 96.0% |
| Microsoft Word | 123 | 5.5% | 0.0% |
| Acrobat | 71 | 3.2% | 0.0% |
| Microsoft Teams | 51 | 2.3% | 0.0% |
| Microsoft Excel | 40 | 1.8% | 0.0% |
| Microsoft Outlook | 26 | 1.2% | 0.0% |
| ONENOTE | 18 | 0.8% | 0.0% |
| gpteal.merck.com | 6 | 0.3% | 0.0% |
| newtab | 5 | 0.2% | 0.0% |
| collaboration.merck.com | 5 | 0.2% | 0.0% |
Top Cross-App Transitions (within task instance)
Consecutive events that cross application boundaries within a task instance — the signal where swivel-chair patterns live.
| From | To | Transitions |
|---|---|---|
| Veeva Safety | Microsoft Word | 67 |
| Microsoft Word | Veeva Safety | 46 |
| Veeva Safety | Microsoft Teams | 35 |
| Veeva Safety | Acrobat | 31 |
| Microsoft Word | Acrobat | 30 |
| Veeva Safety | Microsoft Excel | 29 |
| Acrobat | Microsoft Word | 27 |
| Acrobat | Veeva Safety | 25 |
| Microsoft Teams | Veeva Safety | 20 |
| Veeva Safety | Microsoft Outlook | 20 |
On-Case Application Journey (±15 min around anchor)
Apps the same analyst touched on the same case within ±15 minutes of the task anchor. Captures work that spans task boundaries — the Veeva/Acrobat/Outlook/Word context surrounding the anchor click.
Case counts per app are not mutually exclusive — a case that touched Veeva AND Phobos in this window is counted in both rows. Overlap reflects real cross-app work, not double-counted cases.
Veeva Safety DOM 8,854 events 319 cases 100.5 min
DOM-level capture
Pyze JS captures every element interaction — button labels, field IDs, section panels.
pyzeClick
<span>
"Narrative"
860×
pyzeClick
<span>
"Complete"
835×
pyzeClick
<a>
"Show more"
603×
pyzeClick
<span>
"Adverse Events"
388×
pyzeClick
<span>
"Products"
235×
pyzeClick
<span>
"Submissions & Distributions"
205×
pyzeClick
<span>
"Documents"
205×
pyzeClick
<button>
"Save"
188×
Phobos DOM 1,127 events 157 cases 31.5 min
DOM-level capture
Pyze JS captures every element interaction — button labels, field IDs, section panels.
pyzeClick
<button>
"Proceed"
137×
pyzeClick
<button>
"Save Comments"
93×
pyzeClick
<button>
"Advance"
82×
pyzeClick
<button>
"Send to process"
69×
pyzeClick
<select>
"Select Compound · - sitagliptin phosphate Tablet (G"
49×
pyzeClick
<a>
"Cases"
45×
pyzeClick
<select>
"Select Attachment description · Legal · Legal Pre-Sca"
38×
pyzeClick
<a>
"Cases Coordinator"
34×
Microsoft Word Document 421 events 104 cases
Document-level capture
Task Mining captures the specific file open during work — file names often encode case context.
file
V-Narrative 543823 (English) (26544362_0_2_343646)
873×
file
V-Narrative 533164 (English) (26378749_0_4_342805)
659×
file
V-Narrative 533533 (English) (26384397_0_2_337752)
361×
file
V-Narrative 551229 (English) (26664901_0_1_349465)
326×
file
V-Narrative 549707 (English) (26645831_0_1_347236)
324×
file
V-Narrative 552979 (English) (26689105_0_2_348832)
307×
file
V-Narrative 542512 (English) (26522671_0_2_344761)
255×
file
V-Narrative 530932 (English) (26349278_0_2_339374)
248×
Acrobat App 256 events 62 cases
App-level capture
Only application name and dwell time available. Direct instrumentation would unlock deeper detail.
3,090 granular events captured, but no DOM, document, or message-level metadata is available for this application. Instrumenting this app directly with Pyze would unlock element-level detail.
Microsoft Teams App 197 events 77 cases
App-level capture
Only application name and dwell time available. Direct instrumentation would unlock deeper detail.
2,449 granular events captured, but no DOM, document, or message-level metadata is available for this application. Instrumenting this app directly with Pyze would unlock element-level detail.
Microsoft Excel Document 146 events 48 cases
Document-level capture
Task Mining captures the specific file open during work — file names often encode case context.
file
Case tracking list
867×
file
I-0000346875
161×
file
I-0000354334
153×
file
I-0000353124
142×
file
I-0000350382
132×
file
2352822 (v0.1)
131×
file
I-0000340178
109×
file
I-0000348506
95×
Microsoft Outlook Message 112 events 58 cases
Message-level capture
Task Mining captures email subjects. Case numbers frequently appear in the subject line.
collaboration.merck.com App 63 events 32 cases
App-level capture
Only application name and dwell time available. Direct instrumentation would unlock deeper detail.
ONENOTE Document 39 events 22 cases
Document-level capture
Task Mining captures the specific file open during work — file names often encode case context.
RIM Vault DOM 21 events 3 cases 0.2 min
DOM-level capture
Pyze JS captures every element interaction — button labels, field IDs, section panels.
Adherence Vectors
Each task instance is scored on four behavioral vectors. Lower values are more adherent to the mined SoP.
0.08
Swivel Rate
events in non-primary app / total
0.91
Zero-Edit Visit Rate
inspection-only clicks
1.2
Avg Revisit Depth
max repeats of any activity
0.00
Cross-App Time Share
time outside primary app
Meta Score Distribution
Instance count in each 10-point adherence bucket. Right-skewed = healthy execution; long left tail = concentrated pain points.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Top Concern Vector
Zero-Edit Visit Rate — current value 0.91
Investigate why analysts inspect-and-leave without editing — usually missing upstream data or unclear UI affordances.
Vector Contribution to Adherence Loss
Each vector's weighted contribution to lost adherence. The top row is your highest-leverage fix.
Zero-Edit Visit Rate
value 0.91
Investigate why analysts inspect-and-leave without editing — usually missing upstream data or unclear UI affordances.
Revisit Depth
value 1.20
High revisit depth = mid-flow rework. Trace which sub-step is being repeated; usually a data-readiness gap upstream.
Swivel Rate
value 0.08
Reduce cross-app hops by surfacing the secondary-app data inline (API integration or pre-fetched context panel).
Cross-App Time Share
value 0.00
Time outside primary app dominates this score. Identify which secondary app(s) and whether their function can be in-lined.
Lowest-Adherence Instances
The 5 task instances that scored lowest. These are the concrete cases worth investigating to understand the worst patterns.
| Case | Analyst | Score | Duration | Sub-Steps | Swivel | X-App | Revisit |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2324055 | Analyst 05 | 40.4 | 35.5m | 59 | 0.66 | 0.00 | 20 |
| 2351269 | Analyst 03 | 54.6 | 6.2m | 6 | 0.67 | 0.43 | 1 |
| 2271348 | Analyst 09 | 55.0 | 16.6m | 15 | 0.67 | 0.00 | 4 |
| 2314923 | Analyst 05 | 55.0 | 1.9m | 12 | 0.67 | 0.00 | 4 |
| 2347825 | Analyst 05 | 55.6 | 12.4m | 24 | 0.50 | 0.00 | 6 |
Users on This Task
14 analysts executed this task during the pilot. Scatter plots productivity (instances per active day) against adherence (meta score). Top-right = healthy high-volume analysts; bottom-right = firefighters; top-left = careful low-volume; bottom-left = struggling.
Adherence (meta score) →
Productivity (instances / active day) →
11
15
04
14
06
10
12
02
03
09
05
08
13
01
User-by-User Breakdown
Click any analyst to see their dominant sequence vs the reference SoP.
| Analyst | Instances | Inst / Day | Adherence | Weakest Vector | Swivel | X-App | Min | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ▸ | Analyst 11 | 1 | 1.0 | 97.5 | Revisit Depth | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 11's Dominant Sequence
— 1 of 1 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Preview English Narrative
· reference: Acrobat
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 15 | 1 | 1.0 | 86.3 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.00 | 0.00 | 11 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 15's Dominant Sequence
— 1 of 1 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Generate Final Review Form
· reference: Acrobat
3
Add Item
· reference: Show More Details
4
Create New Item
· reference: Microsoft Excel
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 04 | 172 | 13.2 | 86.0 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.00 | 0.00 | 87 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 04's Dominant Sequence
— 132 of 172 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
This analyst exhibits 29 distinct sequences across their 172 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 14 | 8 | 4.0 | 83.1 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.00 | 0.00 | 38 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 14's Dominant Sequence
— 5 of 8 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
This analyst exhibits 4 distinct sequences across their 8 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 06 | 3 | 1.5 | 82.5 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.00 | 0.00 | 35 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 06's Dominant Sequence
— 2 of 3 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
This analyst exhibits 2 distinct sequences across their 3 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 10 | 37 | 3.7 | 81.3 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.02 | 0.00 | 225 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 10's Dominant Sequence
— 11 of 37 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
· reference: Acrobat
This analyst exhibits 18 distinct sequences across their 37 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 12 | 21 | 3.0 | 80.9 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.14 | 0.00 | 57 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 12's Dominant Sequence
— 5 of 21 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
This analyst exhibits 16 distinct sequences across their 21 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 02 | 38 | 3.2 | 80.9 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.07 | 0.00 | 1,780 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 02's Dominant Sequence
— 8 of 38 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
This analyst exhibits 24 distinct sequences across their 38 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 03 | 190 | 14.6 | 80.5 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.06 | 0.00 | 1,458 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 03's Dominant Sequence
— 96 of 190 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
This analyst exhibits 58 distinct sequences across their 190 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 09 | 228 | 14.2 | 78.7 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.13 | 0.00 | 5,165 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 09's Dominant Sequence
— 60 of 228 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
· reference: Acrobat
This analyst exhibits 125 distinct sequences across their 228 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 05 | 41 | 4.1 | 76.5 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.19 | 0.00 | 144 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 05's Dominant Sequence
— 4 of 41 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
· reference: Acrobat
This analyst exhibits 33 distinct sequences across their 41 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 08 | 3 | 1.5 | 73.5 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.30 | 0.00 | 5 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 08's Dominant Sequence
— 1 of 3 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
· reference: Acrobat
3
CelonisTaskMining.Client
· reference: Show More Details
4
milkeyway.merck.com
· reference: Microsoft Excel
This analyst exhibits 3 distinct sequences across their 3 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 13 | 15 | 1.9 | 72.3 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.37 | 0.00 | 83 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 13's Dominant Sequence
— 3 of 15 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
This analyst exhibits 12 distinct sequences across their 15 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||
| ▸ | Analyst 01 | 6 | 1.0 | 71.7 | Zero-Edit Visits | 0.38 | 0.00 | 21 |
|
Reference SoP
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Acrobat
3
Show More Details
4
Microsoft Excel
5
Open Action Items
6
Microsoft Excel
7
Acrobat
8
Open System Section
9
Acrobat
10
Microsoft Outlook
Analyst 01's Dominant Sequence
— 1 of 6 instances
1
Open Narrative Section
2
Show More Details
· reference: Acrobat
3
Acrobat
· reference: Show More Details
4
Microsoft Teams
· reference: Microsoft Excel
This analyst exhibits 6 distinct sequences across their 6 instances; the dominant one is shown.
|
||||||||