Next: a short form and a discussion of your task. No files need to be uploaded now.
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.
One client report: before and after
Manual process9
Automated process4
Manual process
9 steps
1Open the first source and export the data
2Open the second source and export the data
3Merge the exports into a spreadsheet by hand
4Check that periods and metric definitions actually match
5Copy the values into the document template
6Write the findings and recommendations
7Send it to the owner for review
8Apply the corrections and rebuild the document
9Send it to the client and remember to log it in the CRM
Automated process
4 steps
1Data is collected from the sources and checked for completeness
2The document is assembled from the template with current values
3The owner adds the findings and approves
4The document goes to the client, and the CRM record updates itself
This shows the number of process steps, not time saved: any claim about effect requires a fixed baseline, a measurement window and a stated method, and is published only alongside a case.
A single document is assembled by hand from several systems — and the whole process rests on whoever knows where everything lives.
Cuts the time spent producing documents and reports and moving data between systems.
Capabilities and details
Data is pulled from your systems, checked against rules, placed into the template and delivered — with mandatory-field validation and a hard block on inventing terms that are not in the source.
Collects data from its sources, checks it, and produces the document from your template.
PDF
DOCX
XLSX and CSV
HTML and e-mail
API payload
extraction and normalisation of data from inbound documents
What usually gets in the way
The data for a single document sits across several systems
It is copied into the template by hand
Versions drift apart and nobody knows which one is current
Delivery slips because it waits for approval
The process rests on the one person who knows where everything lives
Which documents
Proposals
Client reports
Contract packages
Price list normalisation
Instructions and internal standards
Invoices and accounting documents
Internal management summaries
How it works
The route from input to outcome
Nodes expand: input, processing, output, control.
01Source
Sources
Expand
Input
CRM, ERP, spreadsheets, ad platforms, price lists.
Processing
Data is collected according to the document definition.
Output
A field set where every value carries its origin.
Quality control
Every field has a source of record: on a conflict it wins, not whatever was found first.
Integration
CRM, ERP, databases, external APIs
02Business rule
Validation
Expand
Input
The collected field set.
Processing
Mandatory fields, formats, ranges and internal consistency are checked.
Output
Either a set ready for assembly, or a list of problems.
Quality control
A missing mandatory field halts assembly. No document goes out with a gap in it.
03AI step
Transformation
Expand
Input
Validated data plus unstructured fragments: descriptions, comments, findings.
Processing
Values are normalised; text blocks are written strictly from the data.
Output
The document's content.
Quality control
Commercial terms come only from the source. Below the confidence threshold a block is flagged for manual editing.
04Automated step
Generation
Expand
Input
The content and your template.
Processing
Assembly in the required format, preserving your brand formatting.
Output
A PDF, DOCX, XLSX, message or API payload.
Quality control
The template version is recorded with the document — you can see which version produced it.
05Human checkpoint
Approval
Expand
Input
The finished document and the list of anything that needed attention.
Processing
The owner reviews, edits and approves.
Output
An approved version.
Quality control
Mandatory for anything carrying commercial terms. Who approved it and when is logged.
06Target system
Delivery
Expand
Input
The approved version and its recipient.
Processing
Sent by e-mail, uploaded into the client's system, or passed over an API.
Output
The document with its recipient, and a delivery record in the CRM.
Quality control
A failed delivery is not counted as done — the event moves to the exception queue.
Integration
E-mail, CRM, document storage
07Monitoring
Archive
Expand
Input
The delivered version and all of its data.
Processing
The version, the origin of each value and the approval history are stored.
Output
A reconstructable history: what was sent, when, and on what basis.
Quality control
Retention and deletion follow an explicit policy rather than accumulating indefinitely.
Feedback: monitoring returns data to the rules — the loop closes rather than ending at the last step
Fact control
The main risk in automated document generation is an invented term that exists nowhere in the source. Five mechanisms close exactly that.
Header fields
Source of record: every field has an owning system, and it wins on a conflict
Mandatory field
Mandatory-field validation before assembly — a gap halts the document
Text block
A confidence threshold: below it, the block is flagged for manual editing
Terms block
No invented terms: prices, deadlines and volumes come from the source, never phrased by the model
Signature
Human approval for anything carrying commercial terms
An interface schematic, not a screenshot of a running system. The empty slots are deliberate: they are filled from your own sources.
What it needs
deal and contact records from the CRM
ERP and accounting data
price lists and commercial terms
ad platforms and analytics
spreadsheets and exports
previous document versions
What it produces
proposals
client reports
instructions and internal standards
contract packages
invoices and accounting documents
internal management summaries
normalised price lists
Output formats
The approved version
PDF
DOCX
XLSX and CSV
HTML and e-mail
API payload
To the recipient · Delivery logged in the CRM
An interface schematic, not a screenshot of a running system: the product is assembled around each client's own stack, so there is no typical screen.
What can be measured
Categories, not promised values. Numbers appear only in cases, with a baseline and a stated method.
time to produce a document
share of documents assembled without a manual step
rework caused by errors and discrepancies
time from request to delivery
share of reports delivered on schedule
What it connects to
A specific service is named once the integration is verified.
CRM
ERP and accounting systems
databases
e-mail
document storage
Google Workspace / Microsoft 365
advertising and analytics APIs
Where the human stays
A document with commercial terms goes out only after approval. An unfilled field is flagged, not guessed.
Cases
Where this has been applied
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
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
Can the system invent terms that aren't in the contract?
That is the first thing we close off. Commercial terms — prices, deadlines, volumes — are taken only from the source of record and are never phrased by the model. Mandatory fields are validated before assembly, and a missing one halts the document. Where confidence falls below the threshold, the block is flagged for manual editing.
Do we have to redo our templates?
Usually not — we work with yours. Rework is needed where a template doesn't say where a value comes from: if the same figure is calculated differently across documents, it can only be automated once a single definition is agreed. Those spots surface during the assessment.
Which output formats are supported?
PDF, DOCX, XLSX and CSV, HTML for e-mail, and an API payload for handing data to another system. The format follows what the recipient actually does with the document: if the numbers get retyped into a spreadsheet afterwards, PDF is the worst of the options.
Let's look at this workflow on your own material
An example of your report will help us discuss sources, checks and approval. We'll check whether the economics work and name the next step.
