Skip to content

AI solutions for business growth

The solution adapts to your methodology, your data, your systems and your constraints — not the other way round. Which is why the thing to choose is the type of business outcome, not the technology.

Three solutions

Each has its own business problem, its own inputs, its own place where the result lands, and its own point where a human stays in the loop.
  • Demo: manager profileDemo
    Aplora Sales demo interface. The figures on screen are sample data, not a client result.

    Aplora Sales

    Turns calls, CRM data, and your own sales methodology into a system that drives management action.

    What it movesConversation-to-deal conversion
    • call transcription and structuring
    • lead qualification
    All capabilities
    • methodology adherence
    • commitments and next actions
    • automatic CRM updates
    • personalised follow-up
    • analytics for the head of sales
    Explore this solution
  • Process schematic
    1. 01Signal
    2. 02AI step
    3. 03Manual checkpoint
    4. 04Action in the system
    Process schematic. The steps and their order depend on your workflow.

    AI Workflow Automation

    Removes repetitive manual steps from end-to-end business workflows.

    What it movesOutput per employee
    • leads and CRM: form → qualification → record → task
    • customer requests: classification → response → escalation
    All capabilities
    • documents and approvals: validation → routing → archive
    • scheduled operational reporting
    • monitoring of changes in external systems
    • SLA-driven notifications and escalations
    Explore this solution
  • Process schematic

    Data → document → outcome

    • Source of record: every field has an owning system, and it wins on a conflict
    • No invented terms: prices, deadlines and volumes come from the source, never phrased by the model
    • Mandatory-field validation before assembly — a gap halts the document
    PDFDOCXXLSX and CSVHTML and e-mailAPI payload
    A process schematic, not a screenshot of a finished system. Built for your workflows.

    Document & Reporting Automation

    Cuts the time spent producing documents and reports and moving data between systems.

    What it movesTime to produce a document or report
    • PDF
    • DOCX
    All capabilities
    • XLSX and CSV
    • HTML and e-mail
    • API payload
    • extraction and normalisation of data from inbound documents
    Explore this solution

Three levels of automation

A more complex level is not automatically better. The choice follows the task, the risk and the economics — not what sounds more current.
  1. 01

    Integrations

    Deterministic links and triggers. Predictable, cheap, easy to maintain. If the task ends here, there is no reason to go further.

  2. 02

    AI workflows and agents

    Actions with context and tools. Justified where the input is unstructured text or judgement is required.

  3. 03

    RAG and knowledge systems

    Corporate knowledge and documents as a source of context. The most expensive level to maintain.

Left to right, what grows is complexity and cost of ownership — not value. The level follows the task, the risk and the economics: if a deterministic link solves it, there is no reason to add AI.

How we choose what to automate first

Seven questions that need an answer before work starts. They are not a score: the criteria work as consecutive gates. A workflow that fails on data or on ownership doesn't go first, however visible it looks.

Candidate workflow

  1. Economics

    What loss or constraint are we removing

  2. Repeatability

    How often does the operation occur

  3. Data

    What data exists and how usable is it

  4. Risk

    What happens when it goes wrong

  5. Integrations

    Which systems are involved

  6. Adoption

    Who will actually use the result

  7. Measurement

    What baseline and what target

Passes every gate — it goes first, and we fix the baseline

Fails at least one — into the queue: data, owner and a way to measure come first

Cases

Where this already works

  • Manufacturing · Aplora Sales

    Client under NDA

    The best salesperson's playbook rolled out across a manufacturer's whole sales team

    Conversion to a sale three months after rollout
    +25%
    Client figures: compared with the pre-rollout period in the same funnel
    Conversion to a sale after six months
    +72%
    Client figures: compared with the pre-rollout period in the same funnel
    Case details

    The team's result rested on two people; the rest closed several times less on the same workload. Nobody knew what exactly the leaders did differently: conversations were not reviewed, and the gap was explained away as “experience”.

    Read the case
  • EdTech · Aplora Sales

    We validated the system inside our own operations first

    Conversation review in an admissions funnel: how we validated the system on ourselves

    Conversion from hot leads
    ×3.3
    LearnIT figures, CommaCRM export
    Share of calls that went nowhere
    −40 pp
    LearnIT figures, CommaCRM export
    Case details

    Conversation quality was judged from a few recordings a month. The reasons for a no stayed a hypothesis, commitments were captured from memory, and the CRM was filled in after the fact and only partially.

    Share of second contacts
    +30 pp
    LearnIT figures, CommaCRM export
    Time to send the quote and contract
    a day → 10 minutes
    LearnIT figures, process observation
    Read the case
  • EdTech · Aplora Sales

    We validated the system inside our own operations first

    Lead scoring in the intake funnel: advisors stopped calling everyone in order

    Hot and cold leads sat mixed together. An advisor spent the day on people with neither a reason nor an intent, while leads showing clear readiness went cold in the queue.

    Read the case
  • EdTech · Aplora Sales

    We validated the system inside our own operations first

    The funnel from lead to purchase in one picture: where the money was actually leaking

    Google versus Facebook lead quality by conversion to sale
    ×3 in Google's favour
    An observation from LearnIT's own funnel data over the period reviewed
    Conversion at four or more touches versus one
    ×4–5
    An observation from LearnIT's own funnel data over the period reviewed
    Case details

    Channels were compared on cost per lead rather than on the eventual sale, so a cheap channel looked better than an expensive one even when it brought people who don't buy. Nobody counted the losses between stages: for marketing the funnel ended at the webinar, for sales it began at the call.

    Potential estimate: sales from the hot-lead pool identified
    +14–22 sales
    Aplora's calculation from a comparable segment's conversion: an estimate of the potential from calling 57 hot leads, not a measured result
    Read the case
  • eCommerce and retail · AI Workflow Automation

    Client under NDA

    An online store's support front line stopped growing with its order volume

    Enquiries that reach an operator
    −25–40%
    Client figures: before and after on the same support channels, adjusted for seasonality
    Ticket handling time
    −30–50%
    Client figures: before and after on the same support channels, adjusted for seasonality
    Case details

    Operators were absorbed by repeat questions, complex enquiries got lost in the queue, and the knowledge base went stale faster than anyone could fix it.

    Support satisfaction (CSAT)
    +10–18%
    Client figures: their own post-resolution survey
    Read the case
  • Marketing and digital agencies · Document & Reporting Automation

    Client under NDA

    The first ten days of the month stopped going into client reports

    Time to prepare a monthly report
    10 days → 5 minutes
    Agency figures: a before-and-after measurement of the process
    Projects handled by the same team
    +30%
    Agency figures: project count compared at unchanged headcount
    Case details

    For the first 8–10 days of the month the team assembled reports instead of doing project work. Approvals dragged, payments moved with them, and every new client meant either overtime or a hire.

    Monthly saving on manual work
    ≈$5,000
    The agency's own estimate from their rates: we saw neither the timesheet nor the calculation, so this is an estimate rather than a measurement
    Read the case
  • EdTech · AI Workflow Automation

    Client under NDA

    One account manager runs twenty-five cohorts instead of five

    Cohorts per account manager
    5 → 25
    Client figures: actual workload before and after at unchanged headcount
    Cost of running one course
    −40%
    The client's own cost model; the composition of the costs was not disclosed to us
    Case details

    Account managers kept cohort statuses in their heads. Every new course meant either overload or loss of control: missed classes and blown deadlines surfaced after the fact, when the student had already fallen behind.

    Read the case
  • EdTech · Document & Reporting Automation

    Client under NDA

    Course materials stopped going stale faster than they could be updated

    Speed of releasing and updating material
    ×10
    Client figures: measured on preparing material against an existing course standard, not on designing a syllabus from scratch
    Share of manual work in content production
    −50%
    Client figures: their own time records for the methodology team
    Case details

    A new module or an update took weeks. The load on methodologists grew faster than the team, and the product aged between releases: a student would see an example on a library version that no longer exists.

    Cost of producing content
    −40%
    The client's own cost model; the composition of the costs was not disclosed to us
    Read the case
  • Consulting and professional services · AI Workflow Automation

    Client under NDA

    Answers stopped living in people's heads: search across company documents, with the source attached

    Time spent finding information
    −40–60%
    Client figures: before-and-after process comparison plus team feedback
    Errors caused by out-of-date instructions
    −20–35%
    Client figures: their own incident records
    Case details

    Finding an answer took time, and what turned up could be out of date. Different people answered the client differently, and the surest route was to ask a colleague — that is, to interrupt one more person.

    Read the case
  • EdTech · Aplora Sales

    We validated the system inside our own operations first

    A sales candidate is assessed from a recorded conversation, not from the impression they leave

    Hiring decisions were made on the impression the interview left. Interviewers assessed candidates differently, a mistake surfaced a month into the job, and the head of sales spent hours on reviews and arguments about who was better.

    Read the case
  • EdTech · Aplora Sales

    Client under NDA

    A school's sales team stopped depending on any one advisor's discipline

    Progression to a second contact
    +22%
    Client figures: before and after within the same sales funnel
    Overall conversion to a deal
    +5 pp
    Client figures: before and after within the same sales funnel
    Case details

    There was no priority, and strong leads were lost in the queue. Conversation quality was checked on a sample, follow-up depended on whether the advisor remembered, and the manager spent hours listening to recordings instead of working the bottlenecks.

    Advisor time spent on admin
    −70%
    Client figures: their own measurement of CRM operations
    Read the case
  • eCommerce and retail · AI Workflow Automation

    Client under NDA

    Nurturing stopped being one campaign to the whole list

    Stage-to-stage funnel conversion
    +30–40%
    Client figures: conversion trends after segmented nurturing went live
    Conversion to sale
    +20–50%
    Client figures: observed across different segments, hence the wide range — this is not a single measured value
    Case details

    The customer profile was described from gut feel, nurturing was launched by hand and identically for everyone, and hypotheses took weeks to test. Sales received leads with no readable warmth and spent time on people who were not ready.

    Read the case
  • EdTech · AI Workflow Automation

    Client under NDA

    AI across four departments of a school: marketing, sales, content and operations in one loop

    Revenue
    ×3 in 4 months
    Client figures: revenue over the four months after launch. The contribution of the automation itself is not isolated from it — the market, the product line and the team all changed over the same period
    Operating costs
    −60%
    Client figures: cost trend over the same period; the cost composition was not disclosed to us
    Case details

    Growth meant one of two things: losing quality, or hiring into every department in proportion to volume. No single department was the bottleneck — the seams were, and nobody owned them.

    Read the case

We'll work through your workflow and name the level that fits

Thirty to forty-five minutes: we clarify the problem, check the fit, and decide together whether a next step makes sense.