Automation map
A chosen process with a business case.
- Assessment of tasks and data
- Priorities based on value and risk
- Quality and cost criteria
Process / time / data / risk
You know which task is worth starting with.
We implement assistants, RAG, private models, agentic workflows, automation and data systems connected to real business processes.
less repetitive work
consistent data and output control
restricted tools and audit trails
We start with a specific task and the data your team uses. We combine rules, integrations and AI models where they reduce work without losing control over the result.
The model should not decide everything. We define its role, information sources and access boundaries. Important decisions and uncertain results go to the responsible person.
We prepare the information the task needs.
We choose sources, check quality and define access. We organise documents and data before they enter the process.
Do we have the basis for a correct answer?
The model gets a specific task.
We choose the approach for classification, document extraction or knowledge work. Where a rule is enough, we use a rule.
Where does the model actually help?
We test results on real examples.
We create a test set, analyse errors and define when to hand over to a human. We also measure time and cost.
How will we know it works?
The process knows when to stop.
We design approvals, logs and a return to manual handling. We agree on responsibility for results and configuration changes.
What will we do with an uncertain result?
Before building, we agree on test materials, quality criteria and operating costs. The pilot then answers whether the solution is worth rolling out more widely.
A chosen process with a business case.
Process / time / data / risk
You know which task is worth starting with.
A trial before a larger investment.
Prototype / tests / recommendation
You can decide on implementation based on a trial.
A process connected to your team's tools.
Document / analysis / approval / record
The task reaches the right system or person.
Visibility into quality and costs after launch.
Logs / costs / quality samples
Your team can assess the result and take over the task.
We show model, tool and infrastructure costs separately. Data processing and the solution's level of autonomy need to be agreed for the specific process.
We choose tools to suit the scope and available data.
Models for analysis and working with text and data.
Automating work with company documents and services.
Version control for workflows and testing changes.
You know what we are working on, when we need your input and what moves to the next stage. The schedule follows the agreed scope.
We compare time spent, available data and the consequences of errors.
You identify the process and its owner.
Stage outcomeA pilot objective and evaluation criteria.
We agree on sources, access and examples of correct results.
You provide representative materials.
Stage outcomeA dataset and test scenarios.
We build a limited flow and compare results against the criteria.
You assess quality using examples from your work.
Stage outcomeA decision on further implementation.
We connect the solution to tools and approval points.
You test exception handling.
Stage outcomeA process ready for a controlled launch.
We check quality, costs and the impact of data or model changes.
You share incorrect and unusual cases.
Stage outcomeImprovements and decisions on extending the scope.
Case study / AI, automation and data
There are no published case studies in this language yet.
The full catalogue remains available on the work page.
The scope should fit your business needs, available data and capacity to implement. These questions help define the project's boundaries.
We usually test existing models and simpler approaches first. A custom model makes sense only when justified by the data, costs or requirements.
That depends on the chosen architecture. Before implementation, we agree on providers, the data being shared, access rules and processing terms.
Yes. That is why we define tests, quality checks and cases requiring human approval. We do not base a critical process solely on the model's stated confidence.
Yes. We limit it to a specific task and an agreed dataset. The result helps assess the value and scope of further investment.
We compare handling time, output quality and running costs, including the time people spend checking results and correcting errors.
We run the agreed tests again. The maintenance scope covers updates, cost control and restoring the previous behaviour.
Show us the process. We will assess what to automate with rules, where AI adds value and which decisions should remain with people.
We respond with a concrete recommendation by the end of the next business day.
Step 1 / 4