Start with a job that matters enough for someone to change how they work. A small build still needs to solve a real problem.
I look for recurring work where the effort or inconsistency is visible: preparing a document, checking a pack, finding information or completing an operational task. Then I question whether the current process is the right starting point.
Define the result before choosing the tool
Describe what the user needs and what makes the result acceptable. A faster first draft might help, but the better measure is the time to an approved document. Include checking and correction in the comparison.
Ask which steps could disappear. If the team needs an exception report, reproducing a long manual checklist may add work that the new approach could remove.
Choose a scope you can actually deliver
Look for approved source material, a clear output and a business owner who can review examples. Check platform access and the release route before committing to a build schedule.
A document checker with human review may suit a fast path. A workflow that writes to core systems or needs complex permissions may require enterprise delivery. Both can be valuable. The distinction changes what it takes to deliver them.
Agree the test with the team
Collect representative examples, including awkward cases. Agree how you will compare quality, elapsed time and review effort with the current method. Make missing information and uncertainty visible to the reviewer.
The business owner needs time to participate during the build. Short feedback cycles help resolve the task while changes are still easy to make.
Plan for use beyond the demonstration
Name the person who will own the workflow. Agree where it will run, how people will learn to use it and what happens when it fails. Save the useful instructions and tests for the next build.
A good first release gives the team a better way to do the job and evidence about what to improve next.