One tool, for the thing you do four hundred times a year.
You already know roughly what you need. We turn the rough idea into one working internal tool, deployed in your stack, and we get paid out of what it saves.
Run the sum on your own numbers.
Before we build anything we agree what the loop costs you today, so the honest thing is to show you the sum rather than describe it. Every assumption below is a control you can move, including how much of the work a tool would realistically take over.
These are your numbers, not ours. On the call we measure the baseline properly out of your own logs, agree it in writing before anything gets built, and measure it again afterwards.
The point is not the software. It is the hour somebody stops spending on it.
Your cloud, your accounts, your login. Not a demo tenancy we control and not a tool you rent from us.
Anything that leaves the building, costs money or carries a signature waits for somebody to approve it.
We measure the baseline before and the same number after. If it does not move, you owe us nothing.
Same request, before and after.
Almost every tool we build collapses a chain like this one. The work does not disappear, it stops being passed around, and the waiting in the middle goes first.
Seven touches and two waits become one decision.
What we get asked for most.
Different companies, more or less the same six loops. If yours is not here it does not mean no, it means we will want to see it before we say yes.
Mail and forms read on arrival, sorted by intent, written into the system with the fields already filled.
A request becomes a priced draft from your current price list and templates, waiting for a signature.
Invoices, delivery notes and scanned post turned into rows, with anything unclear flagged rather than guessed.
Two systems compared every night, differences listed by morning instead of found in June.
The recurring spreadsheet somebody rebuilds by hand every Monday, built once and then just correct.
Multi-step processes with owners and deadlines, chased automatically, escalated when they slip.
Two to four weeks, and you see it running in the first one.
Thirty minutes with both founders. You describe the loop, we tell you whether it is worth automating and roughly what it is worth. Sometimes the answer is that a spreadsheet formula would do it.
Before anything is built we agree the number we are going to measure and where it comes from. Everything afterwards is judged against that document, so we would rather argue about it now.
You see it running at the end of the first week, ugly and incomplete. Every week after that it does more of the loop, and you tell us where it is wrong.
It goes into daily use with approval steps switched on. We watch it for the first weeks and fix what real traffic finds.
We take the same measurement again. Then either we keep running it, or your team does, or we teach them to.
What we need from you
- One person who does the work today and can be interrupted for an hour a week.
- Access to the systems in scope, and somebody who can grant it without a six-week ticket.
- Agreement on the baseline number before we start. This is the only part we are strict about.
That is the whole ask. If nobody can be spared for an hour a week, the tool will be built against what we imagine your process is rather than what it actually is, and it will be wrong.
Four times we turn this down.
Who runs it once it works.
Before you ask for one.
How do you measure a saving honestly?
What if it saves less than we hoped?
What happens once it is running?
Can you work with our existing systems?
What happens to our data?
Tell us the loop.
Thirty minutes with both founders. Describe the thing your people do over and over, and we will tell you what it is worth, whether it is worth automating, and what we would build.
Book the call