Custom process systems
The awkward process your generic software cannot fit.
Some operational work does not belong in a standard CRM, scheduler or project tool. It crosses teams, depends on exceptions and needs a clear record from intake to completion. We design and build the focused system that makes that process reliable.
Book the free 30-minute fit callOr call 0161 543 7189
The problem
A commercially important process is spread across inboxes, spreadsheets and memory because no off-the-shelf product matches how the work actually moves.
These processes are the ones nobody planned. They grew because a customer asked for something unusual, or a regulation changed, or two departments had to cooperate and no product existed for the shape of it. So the work lives in the gaps: an inbox, a shared drive, a spreadsheet with three tabs and one author. It usually runs, which is why it is never fixed, and the cost only becomes visible when something goes wrong and nobody can reconstruct who decided what. The tell is not inefficiency. It is that no single person can describe the current state of the work without ringing somebody else first.
Signs you have it
- You will recognise some of these.
- One job has to be copied between several tools before it can move forward.
- Approvals, exceptions or handovers regularly wait in somebody’s inbox.
- The team keeps a shadow spreadsheet because the main system misses important details.
- Nobody can see the current state of the process without asking several people.
- When something goes wrong, nobody can reconstruct who decided what, or when.
What we build
What does the work actually include?
The real workflow mapped first
Triggers, decisions, handovers, exceptions and evidence are made explicit before software is proposed.
One controlled route through the work
Intake, approvals, ownership and delivery status live together, with the next action clear to the person responsible.
Connections to the tools worth keeping
Email, calendars, documents, finance and existing systems connect where that removes duplicate entry.
A useful operating record
Decisions, exceptions and outcomes are recorded so the process can be managed and improved rather than reconstructed later.
What it costs
What does it cost? The audit is £2,000; the build is proposed after it
One price is published on this page: £2,000 for the AI Constraint Audit, fourteen days, three sixty-minute working sessions. The build is proposed after it and priced in its own document. The main driver of that price is how many decisions the system has to make. Storing and showing information is cheap. Every rule is a branch that has to be specified, built and tested, and ten rules cost more than ten times one rule because they interact. The audit fee is not credited against the build, so the recommendation is never funded by what it recommends.
What does the £2,000 cover before anything is built?
Four documents you own whatever you decide next: a business-wide constraint map, an AI opportunity map, an economic case for each option worth considering, and a ranked order for spending. For an awkward process the valuable output is usually the map itself, because a good share of what looks like a software problem turns out to be an undefined handover. Where that is the answer, you keep the documents and nothing gets built.
The whole ladder, including what a build costs and what we do not bill for, is on what it costs.
How long
How long does it take?
Fourteen days from the first session to the written recommendation. The build runs in stages afterwards, starting with the route through the work rather than the reporting on top of it, so the process is reliable before anybody starts measuring it.
Not in the price
What this does not include
Licences for the tools worth keeping
The system sits between the systems you already pay for. Those subscriptions stay on your accounts and we take no margin on any of them.
Support and hosting, inside the build price
A process system runs every day and has to be looked after. Hosting, monitoring and the changes a live process needs are priced separately and stated plainly.
Data migration beyond what the audit scoped
Open work in progress, historic records and the shadow spreadsheet all have to be read before they can be moved. What is in scope is established during the audit and priced in the proposal.
A guarantee of savings
No percentage and no payback period. You measure the process before you change it, and the same measures are what tell you afterwards whether it worked.
One checkable number
What can you check before you believe any of this?
The process was pricing a job. The output is a document with 63 lines on it, all of which trace back to a dimension somebody can check. One process, one artefact, published in full so you can judge the standard before you commission anything. It is not a case study about your process and we will not stretch it into one. What we cannot show you yet is a named client with a published before and after on a process system.
People and machines
Where does a person stay in the loop?
The point of this kind of system is not to remove people from the process. It is to make the process visible so the people in it stop working blind. Approvals, exceptions and anything with a commercial or regulatory consequence stay with a named owner, and the system makes the next action obvious rather than deciding it. Where AI is used it classifies, extracts, drafts or checks, and its output is visible as a suggestion with the reason attached. Every decision leaves a record, which is the part that matters when somebody asks, eighteen months later, why this job was handled the way it was.
Proof it worked
How do we know it worked?
Measure the process before you change it: how often it runs, how long it takes end to end, how much of that is waiting rather than working, and what it costs on the occasions it goes wrong. Those four numbers decide whether a build is justified, and they are the same four that tell you afterwards whether it worked. We would rather you collected them for a fortnight than accepted an estimate, including ours. If the numbers do not support a build, that is the recommendation, and you keep every document the audit produced.
Known risks
What tends to go wrong on this kind of build?
Three, and the first is the most common failure in this category. Building before the process is agreed produces an expensive record of an argument, which is why mapping comes first and is treated as real work rather than a preliminary. The second is the shadow spreadsheet returning, which happens when the system misses a detail the team genuinely needs and it is cheaper for them to go around it than to ask. The third is the sprawl risk: a process system that keeps absorbing adjacent jobs eventually becomes the generic tool it was built to avoid, so the boundary is written down and revisited on purpose.
From your side
What do we need from you?
- The people who run the process, including the ones who work around it.
- Real examples, particularly the awkward ones that took a week and three emails.
- Whoever owns the process, or a decision about who that is going to be.
- Read access to the systems the work currently crosses.
Qualification
Who this is not for
- A process that changes every few months, where a build would set concrete around something still moving.
- A process nobody internally owns, because software makes a defined process faster but will not define it.
- A business where an off-the-shelf tool already does the job and the objection is the subscription.
- A written specification needing implementation hands rather than a diagnosis.
Questions
What do people ask before they start?
Why not use an off-the-shelf tool?
Use one when it fits. A custom process system is justified when the mismatch itself creates repeated manual work, weak handovers or unreliable information. The first stage is deciding whether that threshold has actually been reached.
Does this replace our existing software?
Not necessarily. It can sit between the systems worth keeping and control the process they do not cover, rather than forcing an expensive replacement of everything around it.
Can AI be part of it?
Yes, where it can classify, extract, draft or check repeatable work reliably. The workflow and controls come first, and any important decision remains visible to the people accountable for it.
What does a custom process system cost?
The main driver is how many decisions the system has to make. Storing and showing information is cheap. Every rule is a branch that has to be specified, built and tested, and ten rules cost more than ten times one rule because they interact. Our guide on what custom software costs covers the rest of what moves the number.
How do we know it is worth building?
Measure the process before you change it: how often it runs, how long it takes now, and what it costs when it goes wrong. If those numbers are not worth the build, we will say so. Some processes need defining rather than automating, and paying to set concrete around something still moving is the most common way this goes wrong.
When should we not build custom?
When an off-the-shelf tool already does it and the objection is the subscription fee, because building is almost always the more expensive way to avoid one. When the process changes every few months. When nobody internally owns it, since software makes a defined process faster but will not define it for you.
Do you only work with businesses near Manchester?
No. We are based in Greater Manchester and work with clients wherever they are. Mapping a process needs conversations with the people who run it, and those work perfectly well over a call.
Do you build in our existing stack, or introduce new tools?
We work in what you already run wherever that is sensible, because every new tool is another login, another bill and another thing to learn. New components get introduced when keeping the old one costs more than changing it, and that comparison is made with numbers from the audit rather than with a preference.
What happens when we outgrow it?
It is built to be changed, and it is documented so the next change does not depend on us being available. A custom system that cannot be extended is a bespoke version of the problem you started with.
Free to read first
Would you rather work it out yourself?
Everything below is free, with no account and no paywall. If it solves the problem without us, that is a good outcome.
Tell us where the business is getting stuck.
A short call to map the constraint and give you a clear next step. That might be software, automation, training or no build at all.
Book the free fit call