I’ve never really had a problem with these two although I know lots of people do, in both forms (noun and verb–less so with the verb). But this sentence has me thinking. Possibly overthinking.
“We want to know what we can do differently to a/effect the process in order to make improvements that reflect change.”
Expert opinions here? Does it sound more like influencing the process, or starting the process? Go ahead, do my homework. (Just kidding. It’s my job.)
I would use ‘effect’ if the word before ‘process’ was ‘a’ instead of ‘the’. Otherwise, to me, the sentence seems to be asking how they can influence the process, in which case it would be ‘affect’.
Definitely affect because “the process” is already going, as evidenced by “in order to make improvements…”
Yes, definitely “affect” unless the intended meaning is something like start, or carry out rather than change or influence. I rather doubt, however, that the intended meaning is start, or carry out, because, if so, using “effect”, even if not technically incorrect, would still be an incredibly clumsy and stilted way of saying it.
If you want to be mischievous, you could put the sentence thusly:
“We want to know what we can do differently to affect the process in order to effect improvements that reflect change.”
Um, “in order to make improvements…” does not indicate something as “already going”, and only expresses purpose.
With that being said, I think both affect/effect can be used grammatically correct, notwithstanding the original intent in meaning.
If “affect” is used, it would mean to influence the process (that’s in place already). If “effect” is used, it would mean to bring about the (new) process. I can understand Onomatopoeia’s argument about article usage, but if “effect” is used, both “a/the” can stand in this case.
As has been said, either word could be technically correct, but using “effect” there would be a very clumsy way to express the intended meaning.
Well, “effect” in this case would sound like pretentious corporate-speak. But then, so does “reflect.” I think I’m gonna turn the entire sentence into some other sentence.
Thanks for the input.
The sentence is ambiguous:
It could mean that there is a process under way, and you want to influence the process in order to improve the process. The improvements are needed because something external to the process has change, and the process needs to be improved by adapting it to the changed circumstances. Hence, the improvements need to “reflect” [the] change [that has already occurred]. (“Reflect” possibly isn;'t the best word to use here, but I can’t think what else it might mean.)
Or, it could mean that a process needs to be started, the purpose of the process being to make improvements (to something not stated) which are needed because of changed circumstances.
Or, it could mean the a process already under way needs to be altered, so that the process will be more effective in making improvements (to something not stated) which are needed because of changed circumstances.
I agree, I would completely rewrite the sentence, but I can’t say how it should be rewritten unless I know what the author means to say. Which, at the moment, I don’t.
You’ve solved your own problem here. You’ve done your own homework. Who knows, maybe even saved you own job 
The original sentence as given is nearly meaningless gibberish of exactly the sort that corporate executives spout at shareholder meetings, or put into power-point slides.
Yes, re-write it from scratch. First, decide what that sentence actually means to say, and then add some meaningful content to say that.
I agree with people above who say that “affect” is clearly the right one, and “effect”, while being technically right, is incredibly clumsy.
I think you might have misunderstood the point of corporate speak - it’s to provide a barrier to understanding via a giant cloud of obfuscation. Trying to work out what any sentence actually means to say is like trying (in the words of someone I can’t remember or immediately search for) to pick up a drop of mercury with a pair of crowbars. Painful, exhausting and ultimately pointless.
“Effect” as a verb means to cause [an object, usually an abstract one] to transition from non-existence to existence. To effect a a law, for example, means to create a law where no previous law existed.
“Affect” as a verb means to change [an object] into something different. To affect a law means to take a pre-existing law land amend or alter it in some way.
I am sure the OP knows the definitions and understands the difference in usage of both words. Her challenge was, in the sentence as constructed, both work but present an undesired ambiguity that leaves the sentence open to interpretation, i.e., do they want to create a new process or influence a change in an existing one? I contend that it is latter, in which case ‘affect’ would be correct, but I think the OP is right to reconstruct the sentence and avoid the issue altogether.
Oops. Sorry OP if I misidentified your gender. I misread the first word of your user name as ‘Hillary’.
Good idea.
As already said, the correct word would appear to be “affect” but the reason it doesn’t seem obvious is because frankly the entire sentence is terribly convoluted and seems infested with redundant corporate-speak gibberish. Is it saying something different from “we want to know how to make improvements”?
How about “We want to know what we can do differently to affect the process in order to effect improvements that reflect change without causing a significant effect on the affect of anyone participating”. :D:D
If someone said that to me, and I was sharp enough to think on my feet, my response would be “Ah, go affect yourself.” 