Almost never. Our default approach is to automate around your existing mail, storage, scheduling and accounting tools. A full technology rebuild is expensive, disruptive and usually unnecessary - most small businesses already own more capability than they use. If we do think a change is genuinely worth it, we explain why and leave the decision with you.
We do not publish price lists, because a fair price depends on your tools, your volumes, the state of your data and how much of the process is genuinely rule-based. After a short conversation and an audit we send a written scope and an individual quote. If the work does not look like it would pay for itself, we will say so.
A focused first automation is usually a matter of weeks rather than months. Most of that time goes on understanding the current process and cleaning the data behind it - the build itself is normally the shortest part. We deliberately start narrow so you see a working result early.
We work with the minimum access required, agree in writing what is processed and where it is stored, and exclude sensitive systems from scope where you prefer. Access is granted per system rather than wholesale, and we hand over credentials and documentation so you are never locked out of your own automation.
Every automation we build is designed to fail visibly rather than silently. Uncertain cases go to a short human review queue, validation rules catch impossible values, and sensitive categories are excluded from automatic handling entirely. New automations run in parallel with the manual process until the results agree.
Only as far as you want. Many clients start with the assistant drafting replies for a person to send, and move to direct answers only for topics they are fully comfortable with. Complaints, pricing and anything requiring judgement stay with your team by design.
You can take it over completely - we document everything and hand over access - or keep us on for ongoing optimisation. Processes change, tools update and new question types appear, so most clients keep a light monthly review rather than leaving it untouched.
Usually yes, and often more so. A team of three feels repetitive work more sharply than a team of thirty. The scope is simply smaller: one or two processes rather than a programme of work, and we will tell you honestly if the volumes are too low to justify the effort.
