Nine engagements for work that stalls between your systems, not inside one.
Our service pages are named after what we build. These two are named after what is going wrong, because that is usually what a reader arrives knowing.
Building and running software since 2007We measure the current process before proposing anything
Start from the complaint, not the category.
Each of these opens with a symptom rather than a service name. If none of them sounds like your situation, the service pages are organised the other way round.
A request takes three days and about twenty minutes of actual work.
Work that crosses three systems with a person in the middle, where the time goes into the gaps between steps rather than the steps.
Back-office automation- The four handoffs that cost more than the tasks around them
- Which systems can be connected, and what happens when one cannot
- What we will not automate, and why two of those point at a process change
The document says one thing and the system says another.
Invoices, statements and forms that arrive as documents and have to end up as records, where matching is the part that actually costs.
Finance and document workflows- The failure points in the order they cost you money
- Why extraction accuracy is the wrong first question
- Where a person stays in the loop, and where they should not
The same question is answered forty times a day, from scratch each time.
Support work that is genuinely repetitive, routed away from a person, and the rest handed over with the context already attached.
Customer support automation- Four handoffs that make support slower than the work requires
- What to automate, what to assist, and what to leave with a person
- Why deflection rate is the wrong measure and everyone reports it
The customer is not annoyed by one slow step. They are annoyed by having to ask twice.
The joins between channels, systems and the person who took the request, rather than the touchpoints themselves.
Customer experience automation- Four failures the customer actually notices
- Three costs, one of which is invisible in your own reporting
- Where to intervene, judged by what the customer notices
Internal requests cross three teams and stall in the middle of all of them.
Onboarding, access, equipment, approvals and leaving. Each is a sequence nobody owns end to end, which is why each one is slower than any individual step in it.
Employee operations automation- Four sequences that fail the same way
- Three costs, one of which is a security finding
- Which steps genuinely need AI and which are ordinary plumbing
The answer exists in three places, in two versions, and none is marked current.
Making what an organisation already knows findable by the people who need it, which is an ownership problem before it is a retrieval one.
Knowledge automation- Four ways an organisation stops being able to use what it knows
- Four costs, and the last one shows up in an audit
- Four things to fix before adding retrieval, in that order
Head office wrote one process and site three has a different door.
Visitors, contractors, access and incidents across more than one site, where the same flow genuinely runs differently at each of them.
Workplace operations- Why the paper book at reception is where the audit trail actually lives
- Which parts of a process must be identical and which must not
- What a multi-site rollout costs when that decision is made late
The system was designed by someone sitting down.
Drivers, engineers and crews working away from a desk, where offline is the normal state rather than an edge case.
Field and fleet operations- How the job is designed against how it is actually performed
- Which differences are failures and which are realities to design around
- What proof of delivery and proof of service actually require
Marketing says it passed the lead. Sales says it was not qualified. Both are right.
The one handoff on this site with a disputed owner rather than no owner, which makes it a definitions problem before it is a technology one.
Sales and marketing automation- One lead, two records, and what neither of them contains
- Why automating either view first just makes the disagreement faster
- What we will not automate until a definition is written down
What an outcome-led engagement is, and what it is not.
These are not a separate product line. They are the same engineers, entered from the problem rather than from the technology.
What they are
- Named after the problem you have, not the technology we would use.
- Cutting across several services, because the fix rarely sits inside one.
- Starting from a measurement of your current process rather than a proposal.
What they are not
- Not a product with a licence fee.
- Not a different team from the one on the service pages.
- Not a replacement for those pages. If you already know you need a build, start there.
Describe the thing that takes days and should take minutes.
If it is not obvious which of the two fits, the assessment is the cheaper way to find out. A senior engineer maps one workflow end to end and tells you where the time actually goes.