Solutions
Three situations, drawn from real workflows.
No named case studies yet — when we publish results, they will come with baselines and production evidence. Until then: the patterns, and what we'd check before promising anything.
Bring one workflow01
Scenario
Customer service and support triage
The situation.
Support volume grows faster than the team. Routine tickets bury the hard ones, response times slip, and every new hire takes months to ramp.
What an agent does.
Reads every incoming ticket, resolves routine ones with answers grounded in your knowledge base and order data, drafts responses for human review where confidence is lower, and escalates exceptions with full context attached.
What changes.
Routine volume stops queuing on humans. Specialists work the exceptions they're paid for. Response time and backlog fall. Capacity is released — what you do with it stays a leadership decision.
What we'd check first.
Thirty to fifty historical tickets with known-correct resolutions. A clear escalation boundary. A named owner for the workflow.
02
Scenario
Back-office document processing
The situation.
Invoices, claims, or order documents arrive in every format. People re-key data between systems. Errors leak money quietly, and month-end depends on heroics.
What an agent does.
Extracts the data, validates it against your systems of record, processes the clean documents end to end, and routes exceptions to a human with the discrepancy already identified.
What changes.
Clean documents flow without touches. Error and rework rates drop. Every document carries an audit trail. The team handles exceptions, not volume.
What we'd check first.
How much the documents actually vary. Whether verified-correct historical outputs exist. Whether system access is realistic.
03
Scenario
The stalled pilot
The situation.
The pilot impressed everyone six months ago. It's still not in production. The vendor says "almost." Nobody can say whether to push forward or stop.
What we do.
An autopsy, not another opinion: build an evaluation harness against real historical data, diagnose what's actually missing, make the salvage-versus-rebuild call, and either take it to instrumented production or document the kill with evidence.
What changes.
The organization gets a ship-or-kill decision it can defend — and stops paying for "almost."
What we'd check first.
Whether traces, code, and system access are available. Whether a workflow owner exists. Whether the original business case ever had a baseline.
04
Closing
Your workflow won't match these exactly. That's expected.
The pattern that matters: one bounded workflow, a measurable baseline, and an owner. If you have those three, bring it.
Bring one workflow