Automate the work between your tools
Most manual work is not inside a system — it is the handoff between systems, and between the people using them. We connect what you already run so a step in one place triggers the next, choosing a no-code build or a custom-coded integration depending on what the workflow actually needs.
Book a 20-minute call
Problem: The work that falls between your systems
Each tool does its own job. Nobody owns what happens in between — the copying, the re-typing, the checking whether the other team saw it. That work is invisible on any dashboard, it scales with headcount rather than with revenue, and it is the first thing to break when volume rises.
Approach: How we decide what to build
We start from the workflow as it runs today, not from a tool. What triggers it, what has to happen in the middle, where it currently waits on a person, and what the cost of that wait actually is. From there we choose the build: a no-code automation where the workflow is stable and the volume justifies it, a custom-coded integration where it is not, and sometimes neither — because the honest answer is that the process needs fixing before anything automates it.
How we work
| Step | What happens |
|---|---|
| 1 | Show us the manual process - the one that eats hours and lives in someone's head. |
| 2 | We scope it as trigger → process → action, so the build has a clear shape before we touch a tool. |
| 3 | We build it - a no-code automation or a custom-coded integration, depending on what the workflow needs - wired into the systems you already run. |
| 4 | We test against real cases, including the edge cases that break naive automations. |
| 5 | We hand it over or keep running it - we agree which before we start. |
| 6 | We keep the judgement calls with people; automation handles the repetition, not the decisions. |
Systems we commonly connect
- Jira
- Slack
- Airtable
- Google Sheets
What workflow automation covers
The common shapes:
- Moving a record between systems when something changes, so nobody re-types it.
- Routing a request to the right person with the context already attached.
- Producing a recurring report without somebody assembling it by hand.
- Catching the cases that need a human and putting them in front of one.
Which of those is worth building depends on how often the workflow runs, how stable it is, and what the manual version currently costs you.
Every automation is three moves
A trigger, a process, an action. Something happens, something is decided or transformed, something lands somewhere. If you cannot name all three for a piece of work, you do not have a workflow yet — you have a habit, and automating a habit just makes it happen faster in more places. That test is the cheapest thing on this page: run it before you spend anything.
What to automate first, and what to leave to people
Automate the parts that are repetitive, rule-based and high-volume — the ones where a person adds nothing except availability. Leave the judgement calls, the exceptions, and anything a customer will feel directly. The useful split is not machine-versus-person: it is that the machine carries the volume and the person owns the call. When an automation hits something it was not built for, the right behaviour is to stop and hand it to someone, not to guess.
Where AI fits, and where it doesn't
AI is useful where a step needs interpretation rather than a rule — sorting free text, summarising a thread, drafting something a person will check. It is a poor fit where the step must be exact and repeatable every time, which is most of what a workflow does. The reasonable default is a deterministic automation with a person on the exceptions, and an AI step only where the alternative is that nobody does the work at all.
What shapes the cost of workflow automation
Cost follows the build, not a list price. What moves it: how many systems have to talk to each other, whether they have usable interfaces or need custom work, how many exception paths the workflow has, whether it is one automation or a connected set, and whether you want us to maintain it afterwards. We agree scope and commercial terms before we start.
- Systems involved
- Interface quality
- Exception paths
- One build or a set
- Ongoing support
When this fits, and when it doesn't
This fits when the workflow already runs reliably by hand and the only problem is that it takes people to run it. If the process itself is unsettled — the steps change every month, or nobody agrees what they are — automation will freeze the confusion in place rather than fix it. We will say so on the call rather than build it anyway.
Systems, access and data handling
We agree before we start which systems the automation touches and what access it needs, and we build only inside that scope. Where a workflow moves information between systems, we agree what moves and where it lands. If your organisation has additional security or handling requirements, we discuss them during scoping and agree what the engagement can responsibly take on.
Frequently asked questions
What is workflow automation?
Connecting the tools and people already in a process so a step in one system triggers the next, instead of someone copying information between them by hand.
What can you automate?
Moving records between systems, routing requests to the right person with context attached, producing recurring reports, and flagging the cases that need a human. Which is worth building depends on frequency, stability, and what the manual version costs.
Do you build no-code or custom?
Whichever the workflow needs. A no-code build where the process is stable and the volume justifies it; a custom-coded integration where it is not. We decide that with you during scoping.
What should we automate first?
The repetitive, rule-based, high-volume steps where a person adds nothing but availability. Judgement calls, exceptions and anything a customer feels directly stay with people.
Where does AI fit?
Where a step needs interpretation rather than a rule — sorting free text, summarising, drafting for a person to check. Not where the step must be exact every time, which is most of a workflow.
What happens when an automation hits something unexpected?
It should stop and hand the case to a person rather than guess. We agree those exception paths as part of the build.
How is it priced?
Cost follows the build: how many systems are involved, whether they have usable interfaces, how many exception paths there are, whether it is one automation or a set, and whether you want ongoing support. We agree terms before we start.
How do we get started?
A 20-minute call about one workflow that costs you time. We look at what triggers it, where it waits, and whether automating it is actually the right answer.
Next step: Bring us one workflow
Tell us about one process that costs your team time. In 20 minutes we will look at what triggers it, where it waits on a person, and whether automating it is the right answer — and tell you whether we are the right fit. If we are not, we will say so on the call.
Book a 20-minute call20 min · no pitch