Work Understanding: Step time and waiting
Objective. Read step time and waiting correctly - separating active handling time from time spent waiting - so a reader targets the part of the cycle that actually holds the days, not the busy step that catches the eye.
This screen answers 'where inside the process does the time actually go - working, or waiting?' It is where the central RCM insight lives: the days usually sit in waiting, not in active handling.
See it in the demo
What this screen answers
The customer question is: of the elapsed time in this process, how much is active work and how much is waiting? A Sales person uses it to show that cycle time and handling time are different things. A CSM uses it to find where the elapsed days accumulate - usually in waiting - and to point improvement at that part.
The task
Scope to the process and period, then read step time with active handling separated from waiting. The move, especially for a CSM, is to investigate waiting - time sitting for information, a payer, an approval - not just the active step durations. The constraint is wherever the elapsed time concentrates, and that is usually between steps, not within them.
How to read it
Step time depends on capture coverage - a step the agent does not see looks shorter or absent. The classic misread is attacking the longest active step while the real delay is the waiting between steps: speeding up active handling that is not the constraint barely moves days-in-AR. Read active and waiting separately, and treat a long waiting period as the likely place to act - after confirming it is real and not a capture gap.
Honest limits
The view does not prove that waiting is waste - some waiting is unavoidable (a payer's own turnaround) - and it is bounded by what capture sees. It does not establish cause. Confirm capture coverage with product and confirm with the customer which waiting is controllable before proposing a change.
Interpretation check
Separate active handling from waiting - the elapsed days usually sit in waiting, so attacking the longest active step can leave the cycle unchanged. And step time is only as good as capture coverage.
In the field
KnackGlobal RCM: step time separates the minutes of data entry from the days a claim waits for information - only the latter moves days-in-AR, which is why waiting is where the review focuses.
Practical task
On the step time view for one process, identify where the elapsed time concentrates, state whether it is active or waiting, and write one line on whether that waiting looks controllable or is a capture gap to confirm.
Self-check
Why investigate waiting rather than the longest active step in an RCM process?
The cycle-time days usually sit in waiting (for information, a payer, an approval), not in active handling. Speeding up an active step that is not the constraint barely moves days-in-AR.
A step shows almost no time. What should you check before celebrating?
Capture coverage - a step the agent does not see can look short or absent. Confirm it is genuinely fast, not just unobserved.
Is all waiting waste?
No. Some waiting is a payer's or third party's own turnaround and is not controllable. Confirm with the customer which waiting is actually addressable.
Verified vs demo. Screen is live in the demo at /#/steps; exact controls, step durations and figures are SME-validation-pending.