One recurring workflow, thirty minutes, free. A one-page summary afterwards. It can conclude that you should leave the workflow alone.
Nothing. No exports, no data, no system access and no preparation. A walkthrough of how one recurring AR or reconciliation workflow runs today is enough to have a useful conversation.
| 0–5 | The task: what it covers, who owns it, how often it runs, rough volume, and why it matters now. |
|---|---|
| 5–15 | How it runs today: inputs, steps, outputs, the exceptions that recur and the decisions that need a person. |
| 15–22 | A rough baseline, what data would be available, the material risks, and what a useful first result would actually look like. |
| 22–30 | Whether a pilot is worth doing at all, who would decide, and the next step. |
A one-page summary, within two business days:
That is a complete answer, not a failure of the review. If your unmatched items already clear quickly, or the work is too variable to automate safely, or the volume does not justify the effort, the summary says so and you keep the analysis. Nothing about the review depends on reaching the other conclusion.
The next step is a small fixed-scope paid pilot: one workflow, one defined data path, with the inputs, outputs and acceptance criteria agreed in writing before anything starts, and priced before any work begins. There is no mandatory assessment to buy first, and no open-ended build.
Related: the manual work behind overdue-invoice follow-up.
Finance teams of roughly 3–25 in companies with US$5M–200M revenue, running an ERP or accounting system alongside spreadsheets, where recurring work spans several systems or teams. It is a poor fit for regulated financial services, or where an internal team is already automating the same workflow.
Free. Thirty minutes. No preparation, no data, no system access, no commitment.