The same data is entered more than once
A figure arrives in an email or a PDF, gets typed into a spreadsheet, then typed again into the system that actually holds it. Every copy is a chance to introduce an error nobody can trace later.
Business systems for information-heavy work
Some processes are slow because the work is hard. Others are slow because information has to be moved, re-typed and checked by hand between systems that do not talk to each other. This is work on the second kind.
- Where it starts
- One named process
- What is agreed first
- Scope, in writing
- What you get
- A system and its limits
- Evidence
- Two systems, labelled
The cost is in the handling
In most of the processes we are asked about, the judgement takes a few minutes and the handling takes a day.
-
-
Checking is repeated because nobody trusts the first pass
When a process has no record of what was checked and against what, the safe response is to check it again. The work is repeated because nothing proves it was done.
-
One person holds the process in their head
It works until they are on leave. The knowledge is real, but it is not written down anywhere the business can use.
-
A spreadsheet has quietly become a system of record
It has grown formulas, tabs and conventions. Everyone depends on it, and nobody wants to be the one who changes it.
Five kinds of work
These overlap in practice. A single engagement usually touches two or three of them.
-
AI and workflow automation
A defined sequence runs without a person moving the data between steps. Where a model is used, it is used for a specific judgement inside the sequence, and what it decided is recorded so it can be reviewed.
-
Data and application integrations
Two systems that both hold part of the truth get a reliable connection, with a stated direction of travel, a defined schedule and a record of what failed.
-
Document and submission processing
Information is read out of PDFs, forms and exports into a structured shape, with each value linked back to the page it came from so a person can verify it quickly.
-
Custom internal tools
A small application built for one team and one job, instead of a general platform that needs configuring. Usually a screen that replaces a spreadsheet and the routine around it.
-
Supplier price list reconciliation
Supplier files are compared against your own catalogue, line by line, so the changes you need to approve are separated from the rows that need a human decision.
Deliverables, not promises
In every engagement
- A written description of the process as it runs today, including the steps you did not know were there.
- The working system, script or tool, with its inputs and outputs named.
- A list of the cases it cannot decide, and what it does with them.
- Handover notes a colleague could pick up: how to run it, what to check, what breaks it.
Where the limits are
- Nothing writes to a live system of record unless that is explicitly in scope, agreed and tested.
- An automated step that is not confident hands the case to a person rather than guessing.
- Your approval and sign-off process stays yours. We do not replace it with ours.
- We do not promise a saving, a percentage or a timescale that the process has not been measured against.
Two systems, with their status
Both were built around a process that someone was doing by hand. Neither is presented as a completed client engagement, because neither has been published as one.
Supplier Price Update Sprint
Distributors receive a new supplier price list and have to work out, row by row, which of their own catalogue lines changed. This compares the two lists against the catalogue and produces a change file a buyer can review.
In development Data used: Synthetic distributor catalogue and supplier price lists. No client data.
What it does
- Matches supplier rows to catalogue lines and reports the change per line.
- Separates confident matches from rows that need a human decision.
- Produces one import-shaped file plus a list of unmatched rows.
What it does not do
- Write to a live ERP, pricing table or catalogue.
- Guess a match it is not confident about.
- Replace the approval and import process you already run.
Commercial Insurance Submission Engine
An account manager re-reads a submission package to find what is missing or contradictory before it goes to a carrier. This reads the package and lists findings with a link back to the page each one came from.
Live product Data used: Shipped as PacketSlip. The demonstration here ran on synthetic ACORD 125 and 126 documents.
What it does
- Reads a package of PDF and text files and lists findings with their source.
- Flags missing fields and values that conflict between documents.
- Produces a summary for the account manager to check before the next step.
What it does not do
- Replace an agency management system.
- Underwrite, quote, bind or submit anything to a carrier.
- Send a message or take an action without a person approving it.
Five steps, named up front
-
Understand the workflow
- You provide
- A walkthrough of how the process runs today, and who touches it.
- We return
- A written description of the steps, the inputs and where time goes.
-
Define scope and inputs
- You provide
- Sample files, system access where needed, and the volumes involved.
- We return
- A scope with what is included, what is excluded and the inputs required.
-
Build or configure
- You provide
- A named contact for questions during the build.
- We return
- The working system or script, plus notes on how it handles edge cases.
-
Test and review outputs
- You provide
- Review of the output against what you expected.
- We return
- Corrections, and a clear list of what the system could not decide.
-
Agree what happens next
- You provide
- A decision on whether to extend, hand over or stop.
- We return
- Handover notes, or a scope for the next piece of work.
Each side knows what it owes
Every step names what you provide and what comes back. Where a step depends on something only you can supply, that is said before the step starts rather than discovered inside it.
Further reading
- What to automate first in a manual process — why the step people complain about is rarely the one worth starting with.
- Reading documents reliably, and when not to — what makes extraction dependable, and where a person should decide.
- Why a supplier price list takes two days to check — one process in detail, end to end.
Start with one process
Pick the task your team dreads most this month. Describe it in a few sentences, with rough volumes, and we will tell you whether it is a fit and what scoping would involve.