Apple Podcasts
Spotify
Youtube Music
Spreaker
Podchaser
Amazon MusicThis episode explains why Power Automate often creates more problems than it solves when used at scale. While it works well for simple, user-driven tasks, it breaks down with complex workflows due to throttling, weak error handling, and limited scalability.
The core message: automation doesn’t fix bad processes—it amplifies them. If your system is messy, Power Automate will scale that chaos instead of removing it.
The recommended approach is a hybrid model: use Power Automate for lightweight triggers (like user actions) and move heavy, business-critical processing to Azure Logic Apps. This gives you better performance, reliability, governance, and cost control.
Bottom line: treat Power Automate as a front-end convenience tool—not a scalable automation engine—and design your architecture accordingly.
You may think automation always boosts productivity, but automating a flawed process in Power Automate can act like a ticking time bomb. The M365FM Podcast calls this the 'industrialization of chaos'—when you automate chaos, you only make it move faster. Many organizations experience increased inefficiencies after automation. In fact, 67% of RPA implementations fail to deliver expected benefits due to automating inefficient processes, and 72% of professionals find ways to work around these systems.
| Statistic | Percentage |
|---|---|
| RPA implementations that fail to deliver expected benefits due to automating inefficient processes | 67% |
| Professionals who circumvent automated systems | 72% |
Ghost flows—automations without clear ownership—raise your technical debt ratio and make your platform unstable. Take a moment to consider: are your workflows truly optimized, or are you just accelerating chaos?
Key Takeaways
- Automating flawed processes can lead to chaos, making your workflows less efficient.
- 67% of RPA implementations fail due to automating inefficient processes; avoid this by optimizing before automating.
- Ghost flows, or automations without clear ownership, can increase technical debt and disrupt your business.
- Standardize your workflows with consistent naming and documentation to improve understanding and reduce errors.
- Implement error handling and monitoring to catch failures early and maintain flow reliability.
- Regularly review and audit your automations to ensure they remain effective and compliant.
- Use the ESOAR framework to eliminate unnecessary steps, standardize processes, and optimize logic for better performance.
- Strong governance is essential for sustainable automation; assign ownership and train your team to follow best practices.
Hidden Dangers in Power Automate
You may see automation as a way to save time and effort, but hidden dangers can turn your efforts into a source of chaos. The M365FM Podcast describes this as the 'industrialization of chaos.' When you automate without a clear plan, you risk creating ghost flows—automations that run without ownership or documentation. These ghost flows can disrupt your business and increase your technical debt.
Complexity and Spaghetti Flows
Nested Logic Issues
You might think adding more steps and conditions makes your workflow smarter. In reality, complex nested logic can make your flows hard to understand and maintain. When you use too many "Apply to each" loops or nest conditions inside each other, you create what experts call "spaghetti flows." These tangled flows slow down your automation and make troubleshooting difficult. Slow flows and inefficient loop structures often lead to performance bottlenecks. They can even exceed runtime limits, causing your flows to stop working. Over time, these issues make your automation unreliable and frustrating for users.
Lack of Standardization
If you build flows without following a standard, you invite confusion. Each person may use different naming conventions or organize steps in their own way. This lack of standardization makes it hard for others to understand or update your automation. When you need to fix or improve a flow, you may spend hours just figuring out what each part does. Without standards, your team risks duplicating work and increasing errors.
Unstable Connectors and Services
Third-Party Outages
Many automations rely on connectors to link different apps and services. If a third-party service goes down, your automation can fail without warning. Experts note that unstable connectors, especially those in preview, often cause automation failures. You may see errors like "Error fetching manifest," which are common in community forums. These problems usually come from network settings or firewall configurations, not the services themselves. When a connector fails, your business may face delays, lost productivity, and higher costs.
API Changes
APIs act as bridges between your automation and other systems. If an API changes or updates, your flows may break. Users often report inconsistent behavior and frequent error messages when APIs change. This can affect both simple and complex workflows. You need to monitor APIs closely to avoid sudden disruptions. If you ignore these changes, you risk losing data or causing errors that impact your business operations.
Missing Error Handling
Silent Failures
If you do not set up error handling, your automation may fail without anyone noticing. Flow failures are common when you forget to handle timeouts or empty data. For example, if a SharePoint file moves or an API call fails, your flow may stop working. Administrators then have to trace each step to find the problem, wasting valuable time. Silent failures can lead to lost data and missed tasks.
No Monitoring
Without monitoring, you cannot see when or why your automation fails. Many users forget to add alerts or dashboards to track flow health. This means you may not know about problems until they cause real damage. Common issues include failed uploads, missing files, or bad data from tools like Microsoft Forms. If you do not monitor your automation, you risk exposing sensitive information and harming your security.
Tip: Always add error handling and monitoring to your flows. This helps you catch problems early and keeps your automation running smoothly.
Automation Risks and Consequences
Unexpected Failures
Business Disruption
You rely on automation to keep your business running smoothly. When a flow fails without warning, you can face sudden interruptions. Orders may not process, approvals may stall, or important notifications may never reach your team. These disruptions can slow down your entire operation. You may lose valuable time trying to find and fix the problem. Real automation should prevent these surprises, not create new ones.
Customer Impact
Your customers expect fast and reliable service. If automation breaks, customers may not receive updates, invoices, or support responses. This can damage your reputation and lead to lost trust. Even a short outage can cause frustration. You need to ensure that your automation supports your customer experience, not puts it at risk.
Data Loss and Security
Data Exposure
Misconfigurations in automation can expose sensitive information. In August 2021, a misconfiguration in Microsoft Power Apps led to the exposure of 38 million records. Organizations like American Airlines and the Indiana Department of Health were affected. This incident showed how easy it is for automation to create security risks. Public access to private data can happen if you do not set up flows correctly.
Integrity Issues
Automation can also threaten data integrity. If a flow sends the wrong data or overwrites important records, you may not notice until it is too late. Broken connections or changes in APIs can cause data to go missing or become corrupted. You must check your flows often to protect your data and your business.
Maintenance Costs
Troubleshooting Time
When automation fails, you spend time searching for the cause. Complex flows with little documentation make troubleshooting harder. You may need to review each step, test connections, and check logs. This process takes time away from other important work. High maintenance costs can erase the benefits of automation.
Technical Debt Ratio (TDR)
The technical debt ratio measures how much effort you spend maintaining automation compared to the value it delivers. A high TDR means you are using more resources to fix problems than you gain from automation. Ghost flows and undocumented processes increase your TDR. M365FM warns that high technical debt can make your platform unstable and risky. You should track your TDR and remove or improve flows that add little value.
Note: Regular reviews and clear ownership help you avoid hidden risks and keep your automation healthy.
Defusing Automation Risks
You can transform your automation from a source of chaos into a tool for growth. The key lies in using a structured approach. The M365FM Podcast recommends the ESOAR framework. This method helps you build sustainable and reliable workflows in Power Automate.
ESOAR Framework
Eliminate Unnecessary Processes
Start by removing steps that do not add value. Many workflows include outdated or redundant actions. When you eliminate these, you reduce complexity and lower the risk of errors. You also make your automation easier to manage.
Standardize Workflows
Standardization brings order to your processes. Use consistent naming conventions and organize your flows in a clear way. This makes it easier for your team to understand and update workflows. A detailed documentation style guide helps everyone follow the same rules. Regular training sessions ensure your team knows how to apply these standards.
Optimize Logic
You should review your logic for efficiency. Simplify conditions and avoid deep nesting. Clean logic improves performance and makes troubleshooting faster. When you optimize, you also reduce the risk of bottlenecks and silent failures.
Automate Thoughtfully
Not every process needs automation. Choose tasks that benefit most from being automated. Real automation focuses on high-impact areas and avoids automating chaos. Always check if a process is ready before you automate it.
Robotize for Efficiency
Robotizing means using digital tools to handle repetitive tasks. You can use Power Automate to connect different systems and services, including APIs. This step frees up your team for more valuable work and increases overall efficiency.
Monitoring and Alerts
You need to monitor your workflows to catch problems early. Proactive monitoring helps you fix issues before they grow.
Error Notifications
- Set up notifications for failures. These alerts help you spot silent failures quickly.
- Use run history to check if each step in your workflow completes as expected.
- Catch conditions that can lead to errors and send alerts to your team for fast action.
Flow Health Dashboards
- Create dashboards to track the health of your flows.
- Monitor pass/fail status and error messages for each run.
- Proactive alerts notify you right away when something goes wrong, so you can respond quickly.
Tip: Monitoring helps you avoid repeat issues and enables quick fixes. You can keep your automation running smoothly with timely intervention.
Audits and Documentation
Regular audits and clear documentation keep your automation healthy and compliant.
Scheduled Reviews
- Schedule regular reviews of your workflows.
- Use automated auditing tools to check for compliance and spot gaps in documentation.
- These reviews help you find and fix problems before they affect your business.
Ownership and Documentation
- Assign clear ownership for each workflow.
- Maintain structured documentation for every flow. This includes naming conventions and comments.
- Good documentation supports both internal understanding and external compliance. It also makes it easier to track changes and follow organizational policies.
Note: Clear ownership and strong documentation make it easier to manage and improve your automation over time.
Microsoft Automation Governance
You need strong governance to build sustainable automation in your organization. M365FM emphasizes that governance is not just a checklist. It is a foundation for long-term success with Power Automate. You must focus on process design, training, and the right tools to avoid chaos and technical debt.
Sustainable Process Design
Modular Flows
Modular flows help you break complex tasks into smaller, manageable parts. You can reuse these modules across different workflows. This approach makes maintenance easier and reduces errors. Collaboration across teams ensures that each module aligns with governance and process ownership.
- Modular flows allow you to update parts without affecting the whole system.
- Teams can work together to map pain points and discover processes before automating.
- Early governance defines roles and access controls, which helps you scale automation.
Naming Conventions
Clear naming conventions make your flows easy to understand. You should use consistent names for actions, triggers, and variables. This practice helps your team find and fix issues quickly. It also supports process ownership and compliance.
Training and Documentation
Team Training
You must train your team to follow governance policies. Training should cover tenant-wide guardrails and configurations. This ensures everyone understands security roles and data connections. Regular training for both end-users and administrators improves efficiency.
- Training helps your team avoid mistakes and follow best practices.
- Everyone learns how to use Power Automate safely and effectively.
Up-to-Date Documentation
Documentation keeps your workflows organized. You should create a centralized repository, such as a SharePoint site or wiki. This gives your team easy access to training content and workflow details. Up-to-date documentation ensures everyone has the latest information.
- Documentation supports compliance and makes onboarding new team members easier.
- It helps you track changes and maintain process integrity.
Governance Tools
Monitoring Solutions
You need tools to monitor and manage flows at scale. The Power Platform admin center acts as a central hub for managing and tracking flows. Rencore Governance helps you establish frameworks for Power Automate. These tools provide visibility and control over your automation.
- Monitoring solutions alert you to failures and help you fix issues quickly.
- You can track flow health and usage across your organization.
Risk Management
Risk management protects your business from unexpected problems. You should develop governance policies that guide secure and compliant use of the platform. Establishing a Center of Excellence (CoE) helps define standards and monitor usage.
- Governance policies set clear guidelines for data sharing and connector usage.
- A CoE ensures that automation aligns with business goals and compliance needs.
Tip: Use the four pillars of Power Automate governance to support sustainable automation. These pillars include environment strategy and visibility, data loss prevention policies, role-based access and security controls, and application lifecycle management.
| Pillar | Description |
|---|---|
| Environment strategy and visibility | Structured deployment across development, testing, and production environments. |
| Data loss prevention (DLP) policies | Controls for external data sharing and connector usage aligned with enterprise policies. |
| Role-based access and security controls | Permissions aligned with user responsibilities to ensure secure access. |
| Application lifecycle management (ALM) | Structured development, testing, and deployment processes following low-code governance best practices. |
You can build a strong foundation for automation by following these governance strategies. Microsoft provides tools and frameworks to help you manage flows, protect data, and support your business goals. You must stay proactive and keep your team trained and informed. This approach transforms automation from a risk into a reliable asset.
Real-World Power Automate Failures
Business Process Breakdown
You may think automation always improves your business. In reality, unmanaged automation can break your processes. Imagine you set up a flow to handle customer orders. The original builder leaves your company. No one knows how the flow works. One day, the flow stops sending order confirmations. Your team scrambles to find the problem. You lose time and frustrate customers. This happens when you do not assign clear ownership or keep documentation up to date.
Ghost flows often cause these breakdowns. These are automations that run without anyone watching them. If a flow fails, no one notices until the damage is done. You may see support tickets pile up. Your team spends three to five times longer fixing issues when they do not have documentation. You risk losing trust with your customers and wasting resources.
Note: Always assign an owner to every automation. Make sure someone checks and updates each flow regularly.
Data Breach Incidents
Automation can also put your data at risk. If you do not monitor your flows, you may expose sensitive information. For example, a misconfigured flow could send private data to the wrong person. In one case, a company found 47 active flows with no documentation after staff turnover. No one knew what data these flows touched. This lack of control can lead to data leaks or compliance problems.
You must protect your business by reviewing flows often. Check who can access each automation. Make sure you use secure connections and limit permissions. If you do not, you may face legal trouble or lose customer trust.
Tip: Document every production flow. Include diagrams and error handling steps. This helps you recover quickly if something goes wrong.
Lessons Learned
You can learn important lessons from these failures. Here are some key takeaways:
- Assign explicit ownership for every critical automation. This ensures someone is always responsible.
- Keep documentation for all flows. Include architecture diagrams and error handling procedures.
- Review and update flows after staff changes. This prevents ghost flows and keeps your automation healthy.
- Train your team on governance best practices. Everyone should know how to manage and monitor flows.
You can avoid most automation disasters by following these steps. Good governance keeps your business safe and your automation reliable. When you document and assign ownership, you build a strong foundation for future growth.
Remember: Automation works best when you manage it with care and attention.
Future-Proofing Power Automate Workflows
As you build more automation, you need to make sure your workflows can handle changes and growth. Power Automate keeps evolving, so your solutions must stay flexible and reliable. By preparing for platform updates, adding strong monitoring, and planning for future needs, you can keep your automation running smoothly.
Preparing for Platform Changes
Platform updates can affect how your flows work. You should take steps to reduce risks and keep your automation stable. Here are some strategies you can use:
- Distribute your workload by scheduling desktop flows at different times. This prevents machines from getting overloaded.
- Create machine groups with the same setup. This lets you run flows in parallel and improves reliability.
- Check that you have enough Process licenses for all your unattended flows.
- Adjust timeout settings for flows that run a long time. This helps prevent failures during updates or heavy use.
Tip: Test your flows after every major update. This helps you catch problems early and keeps your automation working as expected.
Integrating Monitoring Solutions
You need to watch your flows closely to spot issues before they cause trouble. Continuous monitoring helps you find and fix problems quickly. When you review and improve your workflows often, you make sure your automation stays effective and ready for change. Monitoring also helps you respond to new business needs and platform updates.
Set up dashboards to track flow health. Use alerts to get notified when something fails. Logging each step makes troubleshooting easier. When you monitor your automation, you protect your business from unexpected problems.
Planning for Scalability
As your business grows, your automation must keep up. You can optimize your flows for better performance by using smart trigger conditions. For example, set triggers so flows only run when certain conditions are met. This saves resources and speeds up processing.
Some best practices for trigger conditions include:
- Define trigger conditions at the trigger level. This ensures flows only run when needed.
- Keep conditions simple and easy to read. Use clear field names.
- Minimize API calls and limit the number of conditions. This reduces processing time.
- Test your flows before you deploy them. Testing helps you find edge cases and avoid surprises.
- Use logging to help with troubleshooting.
- Watch out for case sensitivity in your conditions. Use functions like
toLowerortoUpperto avoid mistakes.
You can also set flows to run only when a specific person makes a change, when a certain column updates, or when a file of a certain type is added. These steps help your automation scale with your business and stay efficient.
Remember: Future-proofing your Power Automate workflows means staying alert, testing often, and always looking for ways to improve.
You face real risks when you automate flawed processes. The industrialization of chaos and a high technical debt ratio can damage your outcomes. Surface-level automation often hides deeper problems. You need to use the ESOAR framework and focus on sustainable governance. Audit your workflows and look for actual outcomes. Deep api integration helps you build reliable solutions.
Take action now. Transform your automation from a ticking time bomb into a competitive advantage with M365FM.
FAQ
What is governance in Power Automate?
Governance means setting rules and controls for your automation. You use governance to manage who can create, edit, and run flows. Good governance protects your data and keeps your automation safe.
Why does governance matter for automation?
You need governance to prevent chaos. Without governance, you risk ghost flows, data leaks, and lost productivity. Governance helps you track ownership, review flows, and keep your business secure.
How do I start with governance in Power Automate?
Begin by creating clear policies. Assign owners for each flow. Use the Power Platform admin center to monitor activity. Train your team on governance best practices. Review your flows often.
What are common governance mistakes?
Many users skip documentation or forget to assign owners. Some ignore regular reviews. Others do not set up alerts. These mistakes weaken governance and increase risk.
How does governance help with a multi-step business workflow?
Governance gives you control over each step. You can track changes, set permissions, and ensure only approved users update flows. This keeps your multi-step business workflow reliable and secure.
Who should be responsible for governance?
You should assign a team or a Center of Excellence. This group manages governance policies, reviews flows, and trains users. Everyone must follow governance rules to keep automation safe.
How often should I review governance policies?
You should review governance policies every quarter. Update them when your business changes. Regular reviews help you catch problems early and keep your automation healthy.
What tools support governance in Power Automate?
You can use the Power Platform admin center, Rencore Governance, and dashboards. These tools help you monitor flows, enforce governance, and respond to issues quickly.
Tip: Strong governance keeps your automation running smoothly and protects your business from unexpected problems.
🚀 Want to be part of m365.fm?
Then stop just listening… and start showing up.
👉 Connect with me on LinkedIn and let’s make something happen:
- 🎙️ Be a podcast guest and share your story
- 🎧 Host your own episode (yes, seriously)
- 💡 Pitch topics the community actually wants to hear
- 🌍 Build your personal brand in the Microsoft 365 space
This isn’t just a podcast — it’s a platform for people who take action.
🔥 Most people wait. The best ones don’t.
👉 Connect with me on LinkedIn and send me a message:
"I want in"
Let’s build something awesome 👊
1
00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:02,200
You think you're digitally transforming your business,
2
00:00:02,200 --> 00:00:04,960
but in reality, you're actually industrializing chaos.
3
00:00:04,960 --> 00:00:07,080
Most organizations today are wrapping broken,
4
00:00:07,080 --> 00:00:09,520
manual workflows in shiny power-automate flows
5
00:00:09,520 --> 00:00:10,520
and calling it progress,
6
00:00:10,520 --> 00:00:12,060
but speeding up a flawed process
7
00:00:12,060 --> 00:00:13,480
doesn't actually fix the problem,
8
00:00:13,480 --> 00:00:15,560
it just compounds your organizational debt.
9
00:00:15,560 --> 00:00:16,960
This is the 24-month cliff.
10
00:00:16,960 --> 00:00:18,800
Technical debt costs don't just grow.
11
00:00:18,800 --> 00:00:21,240
They triple every two years if you leave them unmanaged.
12
00:00:21,240 --> 00:00:23,080
We're moving from manageable human error
13
00:00:23,080 --> 00:00:24,960
to high-speed systemic failure.
14
00:00:24,960 --> 00:00:25,960
In the next 20 minutes,
15
00:00:25,960 --> 00:00:27,040
I'm showing you the framework
16
00:00:27,040 --> 00:00:28,400
to stop scaling in efficiency
17
00:00:28,400 --> 00:00:30,240
and start building structural integrity.
18
00:00:30,240 --> 00:00:32,640
If you want more deep dives into Microsoft strategy,
19
00:00:32,640 --> 00:00:34,840
subscribe to the M365FM podcast.
20
00:00:34,840 --> 00:00:36,240
Let's get into why your automation
21
00:00:36,240 --> 00:00:37,960
might be a ticking time bomb.
22
00:00:37,960 --> 00:00:40,320
The mirage of speed, the fundamental flow
23
00:00:40,320 --> 00:00:41,760
in how we approach the power platform
24
00:00:41,760 --> 00:00:43,320
is something I call creation biased.
25
00:00:43,320 --> 00:00:45,320
It's the tendency to prioritize the speed
26
00:00:45,320 --> 00:00:47,560
of building a solution over the long-term stability
27
00:00:47,560 --> 00:00:48,440
of the outcome.
28
00:00:48,440 --> 00:00:51,920
We celebrate the maker who spins up a flow in an afternoon,
29
00:00:51,920 --> 00:00:53,640
but we rarely audit the structural rot
30
00:00:53,640 --> 00:00:55,400
they've just introduced into the tenant.
31
00:00:55,400 --> 00:00:57,680
Low-code makes it too easy to digitize a mess.
32
00:00:57,680 --> 00:01:01,000
It leads to what I call the model of unintended consequences.
33
00:01:01,000 --> 00:01:03,960
We mistake faster execution for process improvement,
34
00:01:03,960 --> 00:01:07,360
but a fast-bad process is just an expensive liability.
35
00:01:07,360 --> 00:01:09,240
Think about how a typical workflow evolves.
36
00:01:09,240 --> 00:01:11,680
You have a manual process that's a bit clunky,
37
00:01:11,680 --> 00:01:13,240
maybe it involves three spreadsheets
38
00:01:13,240 --> 00:01:14,840
and a lot of back and forth email.
39
00:01:14,840 --> 00:01:17,080
Instead of looking at why those spreadsheets exist,
40
00:01:17,080 --> 00:01:19,600
you build a flow to move the data between them faster.
41
00:01:19,600 --> 00:01:21,040
You've just paved the cow path.
42
00:01:21,040 --> 00:01:22,400
You haven't improved the work,
43
00:01:22,400 --> 00:01:24,560
you've just made the mess invisible to the naked eye.
44
00:01:24,560 --> 00:01:26,240
This is the cost of the mess.
45
00:01:26,240 --> 00:01:28,240
Manual workarounds and shadow spreadsheets
46
00:01:28,240 --> 00:01:30,080
survive inside your automation.
47
00:01:30,080 --> 00:01:33,600
Creating quiet cost centers that drain your team's time.
48
00:01:33,600 --> 00:01:35,160
The reality is that citizen development
49
00:01:35,160 --> 00:01:36,920
without guardrails isn't empowerment.
50
00:01:36,920 --> 00:01:38,480
It's actually just distributing risk
51
00:01:38,480 --> 00:01:41,480
across your entire Microsoft 365 tenant.
52
00:01:41,480 --> 00:01:44,440
Every unmanaged flow is a potential point of failure
53
00:01:44,440 --> 00:01:46,560
that IT doesn't see until it's too late.
54
00:01:46,560 --> 00:01:49,160
We see this in the paradox of the 19%.
55
00:01:49,160 --> 00:01:53,000
Statistics show that most IT budgets only have about 19% left
56
00:01:53,000 --> 00:01:54,200
for actual innovation.
57
00:01:54,200 --> 00:01:56,320
The rest, it's swallowed by maintenance.
58
00:01:56,320 --> 00:01:58,080
It's the tax you pay for legacy debt.
59
00:01:58,080 --> 00:02:00,840
If you don't refactor your processes before you automate them,
60
00:02:00,840 --> 00:02:03,440
you are simply signing up for a higher tax rate next year.
61
00:02:03,440 --> 00:02:06,000
We've built hierarchies for a world that no longer exists.
62
00:02:06,000 --> 00:02:07,720
We used to have time to find information.
63
00:02:07,720 --> 00:02:09,200
Now, work starts with context.
64
00:02:09,200 --> 00:02:11,240
If your automation doesn't provide that context,
65
00:02:11,240 --> 00:02:12,080
it's just noise.
66
00:02:12,080 --> 00:02:15,400
You publish the content and then nobody uses it or worse.
67
00:02:15,400 --> 00:02:16,960
They use it and it breaks in a way
68
00:02:16,960 --> 00:02:19,120
that creates a data integrity nightmare.
69
00:02:19,120 --> 00:02:20,480
The flow isn't the tool.
70
00:02:20,480 --> 00:02:22,240
Power automate is a world class engine.
71
00:02:22,240 --> 00:02:25,280
The floor is the assumption that the tool can fix a broken model
72
00:02:25,280 --> 00:02:25,800
of work.
73
00:02:25,800 --> 00:02:27,880
When you scale a mess, you don't get efficiency.
74
00:02:27,880 --> 00:02:29,240
You get a bigger faster mess.
75
00:02:29,240 --> 00:02:32,160
You get a system where errors propagate at the speed of the cloud.
76
00:02:32,160 --> 00:02:33,800
Imagine an invoice approval flow that's
77
00:02:33,800 --> 00:02:35,680
built on a flawed logic gate.
78
00:02:35,680 --> 00:02:37,920
In the manual world, a human might catch the error
79
00:02:37,920 --> 00:02:39,320
in the industrialized world.
80
00:02:39,320 --> 00:02:41,640
You process 5,000 incorrect invoices
81
00:02:41,640 --> 00:02:43,560
before the first cup of coffee is finished.
82
00:02:43,560 --> 00:02:45,040
That's the risk of unmanaged scale.
83
00:02:45,040 --> 00:02:46,760
It removes the human friction that
84
00:02:46,760 --> 00:02:48,360
used to act as a safety net.
85
00:02:48,360 --> 00:02:49,920
So what's actually happening is that we're building
86
00:02:49,920 --> 00:02:51,720
a digital facade on the surface.
87
00:02:51,720 --> 00:02:53,800
Everything looks automated, but underneath
88
00:02:53,800 --> 00:02:55,600
the structural integrity is crumbling.
89
00:02:55,600 --> 00:02:56,560
You're in a meeting.
90
00:02:56,560 --> 00:02:57,640
You need an answer.
91
00:02:57,640 --> 00:03:00,120
But the flow that generates the report is stuck in a loop
92
00:03:00,120 --> 00:03:02,240
because a share point list reached its threshold.
93
00:03:02,240 --> 00:03:03,960
You navigate, you search, you waste time.
94
00:03:03,960 --> 00:03:06,360
The assumption was that the automation would handle it.
95
00:03:06,360 --> 00:03:08,800
But because the process wasn't simplified first,
96
00:03:08,800 --> 00:03:10,360
the automation became the bottleneck.
97
00:03:10,360 --> 00:03:13,000
We need to shift our focus from how fast we can build
98
00:03:13,000 --> 00:03:14,280
to how well we can sustain.
99
00:03:14,280 --> 00:03:16,920
If your team spends more time babysitting existing flows
100
00:03:16,920 --> 00:03:19,440
than creating new value, you've reached the tipping point.
101
00:03:19,440 --> 00:03:20,840
You aren't innovating anymore.
102
00:03:20,840 --> 00:03:23,080
You're just managing the industrialization of chaos.
103
00:03:23,080 --> 00:03:24,800
And that is a very expensive place to be.
104
00:03:24,800 --> 00:03:26,560
We need a better way to diagnose the rot
105
00:03:26,560 --> 00:03:28,520
before it takes down the entire system.
106
00:03:28,520 --> 00:03:30,760
Because in reality, the mirage of speed
107
00:03:30,760 --> 00:03:32,920
is exactly what's slowing you down.
108
00:03:32,920 --> 00:03:34,560
Diagnosing the structural rot.
109
00:03:34,560 --> 00:03:37,400
To fix a system, you have to look at where it's actually decaying.
110
00:03:37,400 --> 00:03:39,080
We need to talk about the ordered black hole.
111
00:03:39,080 --> 00:03:41,200
This is the dark corner of your Microsoft tenant
112
00:03:41,200 --> 00:03:43,160
where flows exist without documentation,
113
00:03:43,160 --> 00:03:45,760
versioning, or any traceable intent.
114
00:03:45,760 --> 00:03:48,280
In most organizations, these are the ghosts in the machine
115
00:03:48,280 --> 00:03:49,160
scripts.
116
00:03:49,160 --> 00:03:51,520
They were built to solve a specific problem three years ago
117
00:03:51,520 --> 00:03:53,280
by someone who no longer works there.
118
00:03:53,280 --> 00:03:54,000
Now, they just run.
119
00:03:54,000 --> 00:03:55,400
They consume API calls.
120
00:03:55,400 --> 00:03:56,160
They move data.
121
00:03:56,160 --> 00:03:57,080
But nobody can tell you why.
122
00:03:57,080 --> 00:03:58,840
This isn't just a management annoyance.
123
00:03:58,840 --> 00:04:01,600
It is a fundamental threat to your operational continuity.
124
00:04:01,600 --> 00:04:04,480
When the logic is hidden, the risk is unquantifiable.
125
00:04:04,480 --> 00:04:07,080
We need a North Star metric to cut through the noise.
126
00:04:07,080 --> 00:04:09,560
Forget about total runs or active users.
127
00:04:09,560 --> 00:04:10,760
Those are vanity numbers.
128
00:04:10,760 --> 00:04:12,480
The metric that matters is the percentage
129
00:04:12,480 --> 00:04:15,520
of often or unowned flows in your environment.
130
00:04:15,520 --> 00:04:17,960
This is the ultimate indicator of structural rot.
131
00:04:17,960 --> 00:04:19,840
If a flow has no designated owner,
132
00:04:19,840 --> 00:04:22,000
it is a liability waiting to detonate.
133
00:04:22,000 --> 00:04:24,280
Research shows that in large environments,
134
00:04:24,280 --> 00:04:27,440
over 50% of active flows lack any clear ownership
135
00:04:27,440 --> 00:04:28,680
or review cycle.
136
00:04:28,680 --> 00:04:30,840
That is a staggering amount of unmanaged risk.
137
00:04:30,840 --> 00:04:33,840
If no one owns the flow, no one fixes it when it fails.
138
00:04:33,840 --> 00:04:35,960
Eventually, no one will even know it existed
139
00:04:35,960 --> 00:04:38,480
until a critical business process simply stops.
140
00:04:38,480 --> 00:04:41,000
You can perform a quick diagnostic check right now.
141
00:04:41,000 --> 00:04:43,080
Look at your last three major flow failures.
142
00:04:43,080 --> 00:04:46,080
Was the remediation time longer than the original build time?
143
00:04:46,080 --> 00:04:47,880
If the answer is yes, you have a structural
144
00:04:47,880 --> 00:04:48,480
crisis.
145
00:04:48,480 --> 00:04:50,960
It means your architecture is so brittle and poorly documented
146
00:04:50,960 --> 00:04:53,680
that it's actually easier to start over than to repair
147
00:04:53,680 --> 00:04:54,600
what you have.
148
00:04:54,600 --> 00:04:56,400
That is the definition of a failed model.
149
00:04:56,400 --> 00:04:58,680
You are spending your most expensive engineering hours
150
00:04:58,680 --> 00:05:00,960
playing detective in a maze of your own making.
151
00:05:00,960 --> 00:05:03,400
This happens because we treat automation as a set
152
00:05:03,400 --> 00:05:06,720
and forget task rather than a living product.
153
00:05:06,720 --> 00:05:08,600
Then there is the identity blind spot.
154
00:05:08,600 --> 00:05:10,000
This is perhaps the most common way
155
00:05:10,000 --> 00:05:11,800
organizations scale their chaos.
156
00:05:11,800 --> 00:05:14,960
We tie critical business logic to individual user accounts.
157
00:05:14,960 --> 00:05:16,440
It seems easy during development.
158
00:05:16,440 --> 00:05:18,400
You just use your own connection, right?
159
00:05:18,400 --> 00:05:20,120
But this creates a ticking time bomb.
160
00:05:20,120 --> 00:05:22,920
When that person leaves the company or changes their password,
161
00:05:22,920 --> 00:05:24,680
the entire chain collapses.
162
00:05:24,680 --> 00:05:26,840
I've seen cases where a single lever took the company's
163
00:05:26,840 --> 00:05:28,760
entire global approval chain with them.
164
00:05:28,760 --> 00:05:31,520
One deactivated account triggered a cascade of failures
165
00:05:31,520 --> 00:05:33,520
that took days to untangle because the connections were
166
00:05:33,520 --> 00:05:36,520
buried deep inside unmanaged undocumented flows.
167
00:05:36,520 --> 00:05:38,040
This isn't just about technical settings.
168
00:05:38,040 --> 00:05:40,240
It's about the lack of a clear operating model.
169
00:05:40,240 --> 00:05:42,320
We deploy policies and labels, but we fail
170
00:05:42,320 --> 00:05:44,560
to design the human accountability structures that
171
00:05:44,560 --> 00:05:45,160
sustain them.
172
00:05:45,160 --> 00:05:47,720
You might have a dashboard that looks green.
173
00:05:47,720 --> 00:05:50,440
All your flows are succeeding, but that is often just
174
00:05:50,440 --> 00:05:51,760
compliance theater.
175
00:05:51,760 --> 00:05:54,040
Beneath the surface, the exposure is growing.
176
00:05:54,040 --> 00:05:56,960
Data is moving through improperly secured connectors.
177
00:05:56,960 --> 00:05:58,320
Sensitive intellectual property is
178
00:05:58,320 --> 00:06:00,760
being synced to unmanaged personal folders
179
00:06:00,760 --> 00:06:03,000
because there is no life cycle transparency.
180
00:06:03,000 --> 00:06:04,520
The rod spreads quietly.
181
00:06:04,520 --> 00:06:06,040
The moment this breaks is usually
182
00:06:06,040 --> 00:06:09,320
during a high stakes event and audit, a security breach,
183
00:06:09,320 --> 00:06:11,000
a major system migration.
184
00:06:11,000 --> 00:06:13,240
That's when you realize that your digital transformation
185
00:06:13,240 --> 00:06:15,920
was actually just a series of ad hoc scripts layered
186
00:06:15,920 --> 00:06:17,440
over unresolved legacy problems.
187
00:06:17,440 --> 00:06:18,600
You haven't modernized.
188
00:06:18,600 --> 00:06:20,400
You've just digitized the fragility.
189
00:06:20,400 --> 00:06:22,280
To stop the decay, we have to stop
190
00:06:22,280 --> 00:06:24,080
looking at flows as isolated tools.
191
00:06:24,080 --> 00:06:26,640
We have to start seeing them as interconnected parts
192
00:06:26,640 --> 00:06:28,800
of a unified digital operating layer.
193
00:06:28,800 --> 00:06:31,960
If you continue to govern in silos, optimizing one department
194
00:06:31,960 --> 00:06:33,480
while ignoring the aggregate sprawl,
195
00:06:33,480 --> 00:06:35,000
the result is inevitable.
196
00:06:35,000 --> 00:06:36,480
The rod will eventually reach the core.
197
00:06:36,480 --> 00:06:38,440
We need to move past the ad hoc phase
198
00:06:38,440 --> 00:06:41,120
and implement a framework that treats structural integrity
199
00:06:41,120 --> 00:06:43,160
as a non-negotiable requirement.
200
00:06:43,160 --> 00:06:45,680
The technical debt ratio, TDR framework,
201
00:06:45,680 --> 00:06:47,440
to move beyond the ad hoc mess,
202
00:06:47,440 --> 00:06:49,160
we need to stop talking about bugs
203
00:06:49,160 --> 00:06:51,720
and start talking about the technical debt ratio.
204
00:06:51,720 --> 00:06:53,480
This is how we move from emotional arguments
205
00:06:53,480 --> 00:06:56,080
about clunky tools to hard financial data
206
00:06:56,080 --> 00:06:57,920
that leadership actually respects.
207
00:06:57,920 --> 00:06:59,880
We need a standardized way to quantify
208
00:06:59,880 --> 00:07:01,680
the cost of our shortcuts.
209
00:07:01,680 --> 00:07:03,560
The formula is actually quite simple.
210
00:07:03,560 --> 00:07:06,240
TDR equals the cost to fix your automation debt
211
00:07:06,240 --> 00:07:08,800
divided by the total automation investment multiplied
212
00:07:08,800 --> 00:07:09,800
by 100.
213
00:07:09,800 --> 00:07:11,680
It's a percentage that tells you exactly how much
214
00:07:11,680 --> 00:07:14,480
of your capital is being held hostage by past mistakes.
215
00:07:14,480 --> 00:07:16,880
If your TDR is under 5%, you're in the clear,
216
00:07:16,880 --> 00:07:19,720
you're building clean, modular, and sustainable systems.
217
00:07:19,720 --> 00:07:21,920
But if that number climbs over 5%,
218
00:07:21,920 --> 00:07:24,080
your automation is no longer delivering value.
219
00:07:24,080 --> 00:07:25,000
It's consuming it.
220
00:07:25,000 --> 00:07:27,760
You're officially in a hole where every new feature you build
221
00:07:27,760 --> 00:07:30,960
is actually making the overall system more expensive to maintain.
222
00:07:30,960 --> 00:07:32,640
Most people ignore this because they only look
223
00:07:32,640 --> 00:07:34,080
at the initial build cost.
224
00:07:34,080 --> 00:07:36,560
But the real weight is in the annual productivity cost.
225
00:07:36,560 --> 00:07:38,760
This is the total number of hours your team spends
226
00:07:38,760 --> 00:07:41,720
babysitting existing flows instead of building new ones.
227
00:07:41,720 --> 00:07:43,640
This isn't just maintenance.
228
00:07:43,640 --> 00:07:46,320
It is a drain on your innovation capacity.
229
00:07:46,320 --> 00:07:49,320
If your developers or makers are spending 40% of their week
230
00:07:49,320 --> 00:07:52,360
troubleshooting connection failures or manual data corrections,
231
00:07:52,360 --> 00:07:53,920
your APC is through the roof.
232
00:07:53,920 --> 00:07:56,680
You aren't scaling a business, you're scaling a repair shop.
233
00:07:56,680 --> 00:07:59,800
We see this clearly when we measure cyclomatic complexity,
234
00:07:59,800 --> 00:08:02,000
this is the number of possible execution paths
235
00:08:02,000 --> 00:08:03,240
within a single flow.
236
00:08:03,240 --> 00:08:05,440
Once that number exceeds 15, you've entered
237
00:08:05,440 --> 00:08:07,200
the danger zone for maintainability.
238
00:08:07,200 --> 00:08:09,400
At that level of complexity, a human can no longer
239
00:08:09,400 --> 00:08:12,120
reliably predict what happens when a single variable changes.
240
00:08:12,120 --> 00:08:13,280
You've created a black box.
241
00:08:13,280 --> 00:08:16,320
Skipping the process redesign phase carries a hidden 30%
242
00:08:16,320 --> 00:08:17,800
to 40% penalty.
243
00:08:17,800 --> 00:08:20,480
When you automate a process exactly as it exists today,
244
00:08:20,480 --> 00:08:22,600
you are leaving nearly half of your projected savings
245
00:08:22,600 --> 00:08:23,240
on the table.
246
00:08:23,240 --> 00:08:23,800
Why?
247
00:08:23,800 --> 00:08:26,360
Because you're still carrying the weight of the old manual logic,
248
00:08:26,360 --> 00:08:27,880
you're asking a cloud engine to replicate
249
00:08:27,880 --> 00:08:29,360
the limitations of a human brain.
250
00:08:29,360 --> 00:08:32,280
That mismatch creates friction and friction creates debt.
251
00:08:32,280 --> 00:08:35,640
Real ROI doesn't come from doing the same task faster.
252
00:08:35,640 --> 00:08:37,600
It comes from eliminating the task entirely
253
00:08:37,600 --> 00:08:39,000
through better architecture.
254
00:08:39,000 --> 00:08:41,800
If you skip that refactoring step, you're just digitizing
255
00:08:41,800 --> 00:08:42,480
the friction.
256
00:08:42,480 --> 00:08:45,080
And we have to recognize that technical debt behaves exactly
257
00:08:45,080 --> 00:08:45,960
like financial debt.
258
00:08:45,960 --> 00:08:47,880
You can ignore the principle, but the interest
259
00:08:47,880 --> 00:08:49,920
will eventually bankrupt your agility.
260
00:08:49,920 --> 00:08:52,040
In the Microsoft ecosystem, this interest
261
00:08:52,040 --> 00:08:55,560
manifests as prompt logic debt and integration friction.
262
00:08:55,560 --> 00:08:57,320
You take a shortcut today to meet a deadline,
263
00:08:57,320 --> 00:08:59,640
but that shortcut becomes a permanent anchor.
264
00:08:59,640 --> 00:09:01,680
By using the TDR framework, you can finally
265
00:09:01,680 --> 00:09:03,880
show the board that the quick fix is actually
266
00:09:03,880 --> 00:09:05,480
a long-term liability.
267
00:09:05,480 --> 00:09:07,600
You can justify the time needed for refactoring
268
00:09:07,600 --> 00:09:09,920
because you can prove that it's cheaper to fix the foundation
269
00:09:09,920 --> 00:09:12,280
now than to rebuild the skyscraper later.
270
00:09:12,280 --> 00:09:15,080
This shift in perspective is what separates a world class IT
271
00:09:15,080 --> 00:09:16,880
organization from one that is constantly
272
00:09:16,880 --> 00:09:18,120
on the verge of collapse.
273
00:09:18,120 --> 00:09:19,920
We need to stop rewarding speed and start
274
00:09:19,920 --> 00:09:21,320
rewarding structural health.
275
00:09:21,320 --> 00:09:22,800
Only then can we stop the bleeding
276
00:09:22,800 --> 00:09:25,280
and begin to reclaim the innovation budget that is currently
277
00:09:25,280 --> 00:09:28,080
being swallowed by the industrialization of chaos.
278
00:09:28,080 --> 00:09:30,760
If you can't measure the debt, you can't manage the recovery.
279
00:09:30,760 --> 00:09:32,240
It's time to look at the numbers and face
280
00:09:32,240 --> 00:09:34,080
the reality of what we've built.
281
00:09:34,080 --> 00:09:36,000
The ESO are gating strategy.
282
00:09:36,000 --> 00:09:38,920
To stop the bleeding, we need a filter before the build.
283
00:09:38,920 --> 00:09:42,040
We have to stop the paving the cow paths mentality
284
00:09:42,040 --> 00:09:44,720
that has plagued enterprise IT for decades.
285
00:09:44,720 --> 00:09:46,680
This is where we move from being reactive builders
286
00:09:46,680 --> 00:09:48,160
to strategic architects.
287
00:09:48,160 --> 00:09:50,600
I use a specific gating framework called ESOR.
288
00:09:50,600 --> 00:09:52,960
It stands for eliminate, standardized, optimized,
289
00:09:52,960 --> 00:09:54,560
automate and robotize.
290
00:09:54,560 --> 00:09:56,320
Most teams skip straight to the A
291
00:09:56,320 --> 00:09:58,360
and wonder why their systems feel heavy.
292
00:09:58,360 --> 00:09:59,840
They are automating things that shouldn't
293
00:09:59,840 --> 00:10:00,920
exist in the first place.
294
00:10:00,920 --> 00:10:02,080
You have to be ruthless here.
295
00:10:02,080 --> 00:10:03,760
The first step is the E.
296
00:10:03,760 --> 00:10:04,760
Eliminate.
297
00:10:04,760 --> 00:10:07,520
If a process is redundant, if it serves a legacy requirement
298
00:10:07,520 --> 00:10:10,360
that no longer adds value, don't automate it, kill it.
299
00:10:10,360 --> 00:10:13,120
Every flow you don't build is a flow you don't have to govern,
300
00:10:13,120 --> 00:10:14,640
secure or repair.
301
00:10:14,640 --> 00:10:16,200
Once you've stripped away the waste,
302
00:10:16,200 --> 00:10:19,520
you move into the S and O, standardized and optimized.
303
00:10:19,520 --> 00:10:21,320
You must clean the logic before you ever touch
304
00:10:21,320 --> 00:10:22,920
the power-automate canvas.
305
00:10:22,920 --> 00:10:25,520
If your process has 15 different ways to handle an invoice
306
00:10:25,520 --> 00:10:27,960
because five different departments want their own special
307
00:10:27,960 --> 00:10:31,200
flavor, you have a standardization problem, not a technical one.
308
00:10:31,200 --> 00:10:33,960
You cannot build a stable system on top of fractured logic.
309
00:10:33,960 --> 00:10:35,880
You have to force a single optimized path.
310
00:10:35,880 --> 00:10:37,240
This is where the real work happens.
311
00:10:37,240 --> 00:10:38,880
It's about negotiating with stakeholders
312
00:10:38,880 --> 00:10:40,640
to simplify the business rules.
313
00:10:40,640 --> 00:10:42,640
Only after the process is lean and predictable,
314
00:10:42,640 --> 00:10:45,560
do we move to the final stages, automate and robotize.
315
00:10:45,560 --> 00:10:47,520
This is where we finally apply the technology.
316
00:10:47,520 --> 00:10:49,840
By the time you reach this step, the build is easy
317
00:10:49,840 --> 00:10:51,760
because the complexity has already been engineered
318
00:10:51,760 --> 00:10:52,960
out of the system.
319
00:10:52,960 --> 00:10:54,680
This shift also requires us to change
320
00:10:54,680 --> 00:10:56,520
how we actually construct our flows.
321
00:10:56,520 --> 00:10:58,800
We need to stop building monolithic mega flows
322
00:10:58,800 --> 00:11:01,160
that try to do everything in one giant sequence.
323
00:11:01,160 --> 00:11:03,920
These are impossible to test and even harder to debug.
324
00:11:03,920 --> 00:11:07,120
Instead, we need to move toward modular child flow architectures.
325
00:11:07,120 --> 00:11:09,160
This mirrors professional software patterns.
326
00:11:09,160 --> 00:11:11,800
You build a dedicated child flow for a specific task,
327
00:11:11,800 --> 00:11:14,640
like sending a standardized notification or logging an error.
328
00:11:14,640 --> 00:11:17,360
And you call that flow from multiple parent processes.
329
00:11:17,360 --> 00:11:19,160
This creates a single point of maintenance.
330
00:11:19,160 --> 00:11:21,000
If your notification template changes,
331
00:11:21,000 --> 00:11:24,480
you updated once, not 50 times across 50 different flows.
332
00:11:24,480 --> 00:11:27,320
This is how you build for scale without building for chaos.
333
00:11:27,320 --> 00:11:29,760
We also have to change our mindset regarding the life cycle
334
00:11:29,760 --> 00:11:30,760
of these assets.
335
00:11:30,760 --> 00:11:33,120
The model requires us to treat every flow as a product
336
00:11:33,120 --> 00:11:35,160
with a defined beginning, middle and end.
337
00:11:35,160 --> 00:11:37,000
It is not a set and forget task.
338
00:11:37,000 --> 00:11:39,240
It is a living entity that requires a clear purpose
339
00:11:39,240 --> 00:11:40,800
and a deprecation date.
340
00:11:40,800 --> 00:11:42,760
If a flow doesn't have a sunset plan,
341
00:11:42,760 --> 00:11:44,960
it will eventually become part of the structural rot
342
00:11:44,960 --> 00:11:46,160
we discussed earlier.
343
00:11:46,160 --> 00:11:48,200
We need to implement gating at the environment level
344
00:11:48,200 --> 00:11:49,880
that asks, who owns this?
345
00:11:49,880 --> 00:11:50,920
What is the business value?
346
00:11:50,920 --> 00:11:52,120
How long will it run?
347
00:11:52,120 --> 00:11:54,120
And what is the plan for when it fails?
348
00:11:54,120 --> 00:11:56,840
By implementing SOR, you move from a culture of,
349
00:11:56,840 --> 00:11:58,000
can we build it?
350
00:11:58,000 --> 00:11:59,200
To should we build it?
351
00:11:59,200 --> 00:12:01,280
You stop rewarding the volume of flows created
352
00:12:01,280 --> 00:12:03,760
and start rewarding the integrity of the ecosystem.
353
00:12:03,760 --> 00:12:06,640
This gating strategy ensures that only the most robust,
354
00:12:06,640 --> 00:12:08,720
necessary and optimized processes make it
355
00:12:08,720 --> 00:12:10,240
into your production environment.
356
00:12:10,240 --> 00:12:12,520
It turns your power platform from a wild west
357
00:12:12,520 --> 00:12:15,400
of ad hoc scripts into a governed high performance engine.
358
00:12:15,400 --> 00:12:17,080
You aren't just making things faster.
359
00:12:17,080 --> 00:12:18,520
You are making them better.
360
00:12:18,520 --> 00:12:20,360
And that is the only way to win the battle
361
00:12:20,360 --> 00:12:23,400
against organizational debt.
362
00:12:23,400 --> 00:12:25,280
Preempting the co-pilot fallacy.
363
00:12:25,280 --> 00:12:28,040
There is a dangerous excuse circulating in boardrooms right now.
364
00:12:28,040 --> 00:12:30,400
It's a comfortable myth that suggests we don't actually
365
00:12:30,400 --> 00:12:32,720
need to worry about governance or structural integrity
366
00:12:32,720 --> 00:12:35,240
because AI will eventually clean it up for us.
367
00:12:35,240 --> 00:12:37,200
I call this the co-pilot fallacy.
368
00:12:37,200 --> 00:12:40,040
The assumption is that because generative AI can write the code,
369
00:12:40,040 --> 00:12:42,200
it can also manage the consequences.
370
00:12:42,200 --> 00:12:44,640
But in reality, co-pilot accelerates creation
371
00:12:44,640 --> 00:12:47,240
while doing absolutely nothing to accelerate accountability
372
00:12:47,240 --> 00:12:48,320
or architecture.
373
00:12:48,320 --> 00:12:50,440
If you are using AI to build flows faster,
374
00:12:50,440 --> 00:12:53,160
on top of an unmanaged foundation, you aren't solving
375
00:12:53,160 --> 00:12:53,920
your debt problem.
376
00:12:53,920 --> 00:12:56,440
You are just supercharging the speed at which you accrue it.
377
00:12:56,440 --> 00:12:58,560
Co-pilot acts as a high-velocity stress test
378
00:12:58,560 --> 00:13:00,000
for your existing environment.
379
00:13:00,000 --> 00:13:01,600
It reveals the cracks in your strategy
380
00:13:01,600 --> 00:13:04,120
faster than any human developer ever could.
381
00:13:04,120 --> 00:13:06,080
When you ask an AI to build a solution,
382
00:13:06,080 --> 00:13:08,160
it looks for the path of least resistance.
383
00:13:08,160 --> 00:13:10,600
It doesn't care about your long-term maintenance window.
384
00:13:10,600 --> 00:13:12,560
It doesn't care about your service account strategy.
385
00:13:12,560 --> 00:13:14,080
It just wants to fulfill the prompt.
386
00:13:14,080 --> 00:13:16,160
This creates a new invisible category of risk
387
00:13:16,160 --> 00:13:18,360
that I call prompt logic debt.
388
00:13:18,360 --> 00:13:20,560
These are complex, AI-generated patterns
389
00:13:20,560 --> 00:13:23,000
that the original creator doesn't actually understand.
390
00:13:23,000 --> 00:13:25,200
They've built a black box inside a black box.
391
00:13:25,200 --> 00:13:28,280
What typically happens is a form of digital hoarding.
392
00:13:28,280 --> 00:13:30,800
A user prompts a flow into existence in 30 seconds.
393
00:13:30,800 --> 00:13:31,600
It works.
394
00:13:31,600 --> 00:13:32,480
They move on.
395
00:13:32,480 --> 00:13:34,200
But because they didn't architect the logic,
396
00:13:34,200 --> 00:13:36,520
they can't troubleshoot it when the API schema changes
397
00:13:36,520 --> 00:13:37,440
six months later.
398
00:13:37,440 --> 00:13:39,240
They've traded a few hours of development time
399
00:13:39,240 --> 00:13:41,240
for a permanent anchor of technical debt.
400
00:13:41,240 --> 00:13:44,160
We are seeing a massive surge in these ghost flows.
401
00:13:44,160 --> 00:13:46,880
Automations built by AI that perform critical tasks
402
00:13:46,880 --> 00:13:48,800
but have zero human legibility.
403
00:13:48,800 --> 00:13:50,600
If the person who typed the prompt
404
00:13:50,600 --> 00:13:53,800
can't explain the JSON transformation inside the action,
405
00:13:53,800 --> 00:13:55,680
you are officially flying blind.
406
00:13:55,680 --> 00:13:58,360
The will clean it up later trap is more seductive than ever
407
00:13:58,360 --> 00:14:00,800
because AI makes later feel far away.
408
00:14:00,800 --> 00:14:03,240
But later arrives the moment you hit 500 flows
409
00:14:03,240 --> 00:14:05,640
and realize you've built a tangled web of prompt-based
410
00:14:05,640 --> 00:14:06,880
logic that no one can audit.
411
00:14:06,880 --> 00:14:09,200
You've moved from a world where you had a few messy scripts
412
00:14:09,200 --> 00:14:11,480
to a world where you have an entire ecosystem
413
00:14:11,480 --> 00:14:12,960
of unmanaged intelligence.
414
00:14:12,960 --> 00:14:14,320
This is where the model breaks.
415
00:14:14,320 --> 00:14:16,720
AI-native tools are brilliant at execution
416
00:14:16,720 --> 00:14:18,600
but they are terrible at stewardship.
417
00:14:18,600 --> 00:14:20,640
They can replicate your mess at superhuman speed
418
00:14:20,640 --> 00:14:22,720
but they cannot give you the structural integrity
419
00:14:22,720 --> 00:14:24,400
you refuse to build at the start.
420
00:14:24,400 --> 00:14:27,440
We need to shift our perspective on what these tools are for.
421
00:14:27,440 --> 00:14:29,720
We have to stop viewing AI as a builder
422
00:14:29,720 --> 00:14:31,640
that replaces the need for governance.
423
00:14:31,640 --> 00:14:34,880
Instead, we must treat AI as an orchestrator
424
00:14:34,880 --> 00:14:37,320
that operates strictly within a govern framework.
425
00:14:37,320 --> 00:14:39,840
This means you don't let copilot touch the production canvas
426
00:14:39,840 --> 00:14:41,800
until you've established the guardrails.
427
00:14:41,800 --> 00:14:43,080
You need prompt versioning.
428
00:14:43,080 --> 00:14:45,080
You need human reviewers who actually understand
429
00:14:45,080 --> 00:14:46,520
the code being generated.
430
00:14:46,520 --> 00:14:48,240
You need automated publishing restrictions
431
00:14:48,240 --> 00:14:51,280
that prevent AI generated assets from going live
432
00:14:51,280 --> 00:14:54,360
without a verified owner and a clear deprecation plan.
433
00:14:54,360 --> 00:14:57,280
If you ignore this, you are simply industrializing your chaos
434
00:14:57,280 --> 00:14:58,640
at a higher frequency.
435
00:14:58,640 --> 00:15:01,240
You are using the most advanced technology on the planet
436
00:15:01,240 --> 00:15:03,040
to scale your existing failures.
437
00:15:03,040 --> 00:15:05,440
Power automate with copilot is a power tool.
438
00:15:05,440 --> 00:15:08,040
In the hands of an architect, it builds a skyscraper.
439
00:15:08,040 --> 00:15:09,920
In the hands of someone ignoring the foundation,
440
00:15:09,920 --> 00:15:11,880
it just helps the building collapse faster.
441
00:15:11,880 --> 00:15:14,080
Stop waiting for the AI to fix your mess.
442
00:15:14,080 --> 00:15:16,720
The AI is the reason you need to fix the mess right now.
443
00:15:16,720 --> 00:15:18,520
Accountability cannot be outsourced
444
00:15:18,520 --> 00:15:19,960
to a large language model.
445
00:15:19,960 --> 00:15:21,880
Integrity starts with you.
446
00:15:21,880 --> 00:15:23,760
The two-week automation redesign sprint.
447
00:15:23,760 --> 00:15:25,680
We need to move from observation to action.
448
00:15:25,680 --> 00:15:27,800
You can't audit your way out of a structural collapse.
449
00:15:27,800 --> 00:15:29,240
You have to refactor your way out.
450
00:15:29,240 --> 00:15:30,400
I recommend starting what I call
451
00:15:30,400 --> 00:15:32,560
a two-week automation redesign sprint.
452
00:15:32,560 --> 00:15:34,240
This is a concentrated burst of activity
453
00:15:34,240 --> 00:15:36,320
designed to flip the script on your technical debt.
454
00:15:36,320 --> 00:15:38,960
It's not about fixing every single flow in your tenant.
455
00:15:38,960 --> 00:15:40,480
It's about securing the foundation
456
00:15:40,480 --> 00:15:42,400
of your most critical operations.
457
00:15:42,400 --> 00:15:45,760
You are shifting from a reactive posture to a proactive one.
458
00:15:45,760 --> 00:15:47,960
Week one is about ruthless prioritization.
459
00:15:47,960 --> 00:15:49,920
You need to pull a list of your top 20 flows
460
00:15:49,920 --> 00:15:51,760
based on business impact and risk.
461
00:15:51,760 --> 00:15:53,240
These are your high stakes assets.
462
00:15:53,240 --> 00:15:55,720
The ones that would cause the most pain if they stop today.
463
00:15:55,720 --> 00:15:57,320
You aren't just looking at run counts.
464
00:15:57,320 --> 00:15:58,880
You're looking at data sensitivity
465
00:15:58,880 --> 00:16:00,320
and cross-departmental impact.
466
00:16:00,320 --> 00:16:02,920
You're asking if this flow fails at two in the morning,
467
00:16:02,920 --> 00:16:05,880
who gets the phone call, if the answer is nobody knows,
468
00:16:05,880 --> 00:16:07,280
that's your first target.
469
00:16:07,280 --> 00:16:09,960
Once you have that list, hunt for the orphans.
470
00:16:09,960 --> 00:16:12,400
Any flow on that list without a named active owner
471
00:16:12,400 --> 00:16:13,480
is a priority.
472
00:16:13,480 --> 00:16:15,320
You are identifying the cracks in the hull
473
00:16:15,320 --> 00:16:17,200
before the ship takes on more water.
474
00:16:17,200 --> 00:16:18,960
You're looking for where the logic has drifted
475
00:16:18,960 --> 00:16:20,560
from the actual business requirement.
476
00:16:20,560 --> 00:16:21,960
You investigate the trigger conditions
477
00:16:21,960 --> 00:16:23,200
and the connection health.
478
00:16:23,200 --> 00:16:26,000
You document the why behind every single step.
479
00:16:26,000 --> 00:16:28,600
Week two is where you roll up your sleeves and refactor.
480
00:16:28,600 --> 00:16:30,320
You apply professional software patterns
481
00:16:30,320 --> 00:16:31,760
to these top 20 assets.
482
00:16:31,760 --> 00:16:33,560
This means implementing standardized logging
483
00:16:33,560 --> 00:16:36,080
so you actually have a searchable audit trail.
484
00:16:36,080 --> 00:16:37,920
It means configuring robust retry logic
485
00:16:37,920 --> 00:16:39,960
with exponential back-off, so transient errors
486
00:16:39,960 --> 00:16:41,000
don't kill the process.
487
00:16:41,000 --> 00:16:43,720
You move beyond the basic success of failure labels.
488
00:16:43,720 --> 00:16:45,520
You build in error handling blocks
489
00:16:45,520 --> 00:16:48,240
that catch exceptions and root them to a centralized monitoring
490
00:16:48,240 --> 00:16:48,720
list.
491
00:16:48,720 --> 00:16:51,680
You replace hard-coded values with environment variables.
492
00:16:51,680 --> 00:16:53,360
This makes your flows portable and easier
493
00:16:53,360 --> 00:16:55,320
to manage across different environments.
494
00:16:55,320 --> 00:16:57,600
Most importantly, it means migrating these flows
495
00:16:57,600 --> 00:16:59,040
to service account ownership.
496
00:16:59,040 --> 00:17:00,600
You are decoupling your business logic
497
00:17:00,600 --> 00:17:02,480
from individual human identities.
498
00:17:02,480 --> 00:17:05,200
This creates a resilient layer that survives password
499
00:17:05,200 --> 00:17:07,320
resets and personnel changes.
500
00:17:07,320 --> 00:17:09,160
You are essentially turning a collection of scripts
501
00:17:09,160 --> 00:17:11,280
into a professional application portfolio.
502
00:17:11,280 --> 00:17:12,800
During this sprint, you must implement
503
00:17:12,800 --> 00:17:14,520
life cycle transparency.
504
00:17:14,520 --> 00:17:16,480
Every flow you touch needs three things,
505
00:17:16,480 --> 00:17:18,560
a clear owner, a documented purpose,
506
00:17:18,560 --> 00:17:20,400
and a hard deprecation date.
507
00:17:20,400 --> 00:17:22,880
If you can't define when a flow should be retired,
508
00:17:22,880 --> 00:17:24,520
you haven't finished the design.
509
00:17:24,520 --> 00:17:26,680
This isn't just a technical cleanup exercise.
510
00:17:26,680 --> 00:17:27,680
It is a wedge.
511
00:17:27,680 --> 00:17:29,080
You are using this two-week window
512
00:17:29,080 --> 00:17:31,600
to change the organizational culture around automation.
513
00:17:31,600 --> 00:17:33,840
You are proving that a governed flow is more valuable
514
00:17:33,840 --> 00:17:35,040
than a fast one.
515
00:17:35,040 --> 00:17:37,160
Once the sprint is over, take those results
516
00:17:37,160 --> 00:17:38,120
to your leadership.
517
00:17:38,120 --> 00:17:40,080
Show them the reduction in failure rates.
518
00:17:40,080 --> 00:17:42,040
Show them the time reclaimed by the team.
519
00:17:42,040 --> 00:17:44,240
Use that momentum to secure a permanent governance
520
00:17:44,240 --> 00:17:44,840
budget.
521
00:17:44,840 --> 00:17:46,960
You aren't asking for permission to slow down.
522
00:17:46,960 --> 00:17:49,080
You're asking for the resources to move faster
523
00:17:49,080 --> 00:17:51,240
with total confidence.
524
00:17:51,240 --> 00:17:52,640
Power Automate is a mirror.
525
00:17:52,640 --> 00:17:54,120
It doesn't create chaos.
526
00:17:54,120 --> 00:17:57,080
It simply reflects in scales the systems you already
527
00:17:57,080 --> 00:17:58,240
have in place.
528
00:17:58,240 --> 00:18:01,120
If you scale a mess, you will inevitably inherit a larger mess.
529
00:18:01,120 --> 00:18:02,960
But if you choose to scale integrity,
530
00:18:02,960 --> 00:18:05,360
you create a massive competitive advantage.
531
00:18:05,360 --> 00:18:07,400
You build a business that is agile, resilient,
532
00:18:07,400 --> 00:18:09,080
and truly ready for the AI era.
533
00:18:09,080 --> 00:18:10,720
Your homework for this week is simple.
534
00:18:10,720 --> 00:18:13,600
Find your orphaned flows and run that TDR calculation
535
00:18:13,600 --> 00:18:14,440
I showed you.
536
00:18:14,440 --> 00:18:16,600
If this changed how you think about automation,
537
00:18:16,600 --> 00:18:18,800
connect with me, Mirko Peters, on LinkedIn.
538
00:18:18,800 --> 00:18:21,560
Please leave a review for the M365FM podcast.
539
00:18:21,560 --> 00:18:24,560
It helps other leaders find this signal in the noise.
Founder of m365.fm, m365.show and m365con.net
Mirko Peters is a Microsoft 365 expert, content creator, and founder of m365.fm, a platform dedicated to sharing practical insights on modern workplace technologies. His work focuses on Microsoft 365 governance, security, collaboration, and real-world implementation strategies.
Through his podcast and written content, Mirko provides hands-on guidance for IT professionals, architects, and business leaders navigating the complexities of Microsoft 365. He is known for translating complex topics into clear, actionable advice, often highlighting common mistakes and overlooked risks in real-world environments.
With a strong emphasis on community contribution and knowledge sharing, Mirko is actively building a platform that connects experts, shares experiences, and helps organizations get the most out of their Microsoft 365 investments.