Where this usually starts
Your team already knows which process wastes the most time.
They can name it without being asked. It is the one that eats a morning a week, the one nobody wants to be on, the one that breaks when the person who understands it is on leave.
They also know what happened last time. A tool arrived, a pilot ran, a consultant left, and the system nobody could change quietly went back to being done by hand.
Both of those are fixable. The second one is the one I care about most.
Two things, done properly
What I doAutomation
I map where the repetitive work actually sits, then build systems that handle it. Intake and triage, document processing, quotes and follow-up, reporting, first-line customer response.
- Process mapping
- Document pipelines
- Integrations
Training
Hands-on programmes that leave staff able to use AI tools on real work — and able to judge where not to use them. Delivered on site or remotely, sized from a half day to a rolling programme.
- Workshops
- Team enablement
- Governance
- Process automationRepetitive internal workflows, replaced end to end.
- Records and documentsExtraction, classification, and routing at volume.
- Readiness reviewsWhere AI will pay off, and where it will not.
- Training programmesSessions built around your own tools and data.
Approach
Three stages, and a handover that means it
- Stage one
Audit
I sit with the people doing the work and count where the hours go. You get a written picture of what is worth automating, what is not, and what it will cost.
- Stage two
Build
I build in short cycles against one workflow at a time, in your environment, with your data handling rules. Nothing goes live until the people who use it agree it is better.
- Stage three
Handover
Training, documentation, and a named owner on your side. The measure of a finished job is that you can change the system yourself.
Your team should not need me on retainer.
Every engagement includes teaching. Sessions run on your own tools and your own documents, not generic demos, and staff leave with work they have actually finished.
Who I work with
Two situations, one starting point
I start with the single workflow costing the most hours, whichever one you are in.
Founders
Solo and early-stage founders still doing the admin themselves because there is nobody to hand it to. I start with the one process eating the most of your week.
Small teams
Owner-led firms and small operations where a handful of people carry too much manual process. I start with the one workflow costing the most hours.
Before you ask
The questions people actually have
Including the ones most consultants avoid putting in writing.
What does a first engagement actually cost?
Most builds land between $2,500 and $8,000, depending on how many workflows are in scope. I price at roughly 10% of the annual savings I can evidence in the audit, so the system pays for itself several times over in its first year. The audit is $500 to $1,500 and is credited in full against the build if you go ahead — so if the honest answer turns out to be that automation is not worth doing here, you have paid for that finding and nothing else.
Read the full answerHow long before something is actually live?
The audit takes about a week. The first working system is usually live in your environment two to four weeks after that. I build one workflow at a time rather than delivering everything at the end, so you see something real early and can change direction while it is still cheap.
Read the full answerWhat happens when you leave?
You keep everything, and you can change it. Handover means training for the people who use the system, written documentation, and a named owner on your side who has actually made changes to it while I was still there to help. I do not hold credentials, I do not host anything you cannot access, and there is no retainer required to keep it running. The measure of a finished job is that you can change the system yourself.
Read the full answerWe are a small team. Are we too small for this to be worth it?
Probably not, but the audit is what settles it. The rough test is whether a single repetitive process is eating ten or more hours a week across the team — at that point the arithmetic usually works, because that is roughly $25,000 a year of time at a typical loaded rate. Below that, I will normally tell you to fix the process before automating it, since automating a bad process only makes it happen faster.
Read the full answerWhere does our data go?
Wherever your rules say it can go, and nowhere else. I build in your environment by default. Where a third-party model is genuinely the right tool, I tell you which one, what leaves your network, what is retained by the provider and for how long, and I get that signed off before anything is built. If your data cannot leave the country, I design for that from the start rather than discovering it at the end.
Read the full answerWhat if automation is the wrong answer for us?
Then I say so, and I say it in the audit rather than after you have paid for a build. Plenty of processes that look automatable are actually a staffing problem, a data quality problem, or a process nobody has ever written down. Finding that out is a useful result. I would rather lose the build than sell you a system that quietly makes things worse.
Read the full answerBring me the process that wastes the most time.
A first call takes thirty minutes. You will leave it knowing whether automation is worth doing at all in your case.
- Thirty minutes, and it is not a pitch.
- I reply to every enquiry within one working day.
- An honest first view — including if the answer is no.
- It reaches Hugo directly, not a shared sales inbox.
Not ready to talk yet?
Enquiry received
Thanks — that's with me.
I reply to every enquiry within one working day. It goes straight to Hugo, not a shared sales inbox.
- 01I read what you sent and look at whether it is the kind of process that automates well.
- 02I reply with an honest first view — including if I think the answer is no.
- 03If it is worth a conversation, I book thirty minutes.