Standard work
Standard work audit
Standard work audit is licensed CC BY 4.0. Attribution: Katafacts (katafacts.com).
Customise with AISkill file ↓1 · What it is
What it is
A work instruction written once and never checked again tends to drift from what people actually do. This audit is the sustainment audit's exact shape, applied to a work instruction: restate what it was supposed to ensure, get a checklist of specific practices to verify, and see honestly which are still holding weeks or months later.
2 · When to use it
When to use it — and when not to
Use it when
- A work instruction has been in place long enough to check whether it's actually still followed, not just written.
- You want to catch instruction drift — the real practice diverging from the documented one — before it becomes the norm.
- You want to close a gap the instruction itself flagged when it was first built (a missing key point, an unclear step).
Not when
- The instruction was just written — give it real time to settle before auditing it.
3 · How to fill it in
How to fill it in
- Original objective
- What was the work instruction supposed to ensure?
- Sustainment checks
- Drafted from what the instruction was supposed to change — verify what's actually still holding.
- Narrative
- Drafted from the checklist actually built.
4 · What good looks like
What good looks like
The example below audits the tier-3 work instruction for triaging renewal-risk tickets, fifty-one days after it was written — including whether the step it originally flagged with no key point still has that gap.
Same example, as a downloadable xlsx workbook.
Download .xlsxSustainment audit
60-day audit — renewal-risk triage work instruction
Auditing: Triage a renewal-risk support ticket (work instruction)
Marcus Lee · 2026-11-10 · 51 days since event
Original objective
Ensure every renewal-risk ticket gets confirmed, routed, and responded to within SLA, using the CRM health score rather than a stale tag.
Sustainment checks
2 of 4 holding (50%)
- ✓New hires are trained against this instruction, not just told about it verbally
- ✓The instruction's key points still match the real triage routing rule
- ○The instruction is stored where the team can actually find it during a live ticket
- ○The 'log the resolution path' step still has no key point, as originally flagged
At risk: The instruction is stored where the team can actually find it during a live ticket, The 'log the resolution path' step still has no key point, as originally flagged
Narrative
Half of the practices are still holding — training against the real instruction and keeping its key points current with the actual routing rule. The instruction isn't easy to find during a live ticket, and the missing key point on logging the resolution path — flagged when the instruction was first built — still hasn't been added. Both are quick fixes worth prioritizing.
5 · Common mistakes
Common mistakes
Auditing an instruction that was never actually rolled out.
A sustainment audit checks whether real practice has drifted from a real standard — there's nothing to check if the standard was never actually used.
Marking a practice as holding without actually verifying it on the floor.
The audit only has value if it reflects reality, not a hopeful assumption.
6 · What it connects to
What it connects to
upstream
Work instruction
The instruction's own steps and key points are exactly what this audit checks against reality.
downstream
7 · Where AI helps
Where AI helps
Judgement — stays yours
- Deciding how much time to give an instruction before auditing it
- Deciding what to do about a practice that's flagged at risk
Analysis — AI helps
- Drafting specific, verifiable checks from a description of what the instruction was supposed to ensure
- Drafting the narrative from the checklist actually built
Drudgery — automated
- Tallying how many practices are still holding
- Identifying which practices are at risk
- Exporting to xlsx in the house format
9 · Rate this kata