A fixed-scope engagement that automates your highest-effort recurring client report end to end, with a measured before-and-after on analyst hours.
The rebuild everyone agrees on and nobody starts
Most teams know their reporting should be automated and never begin, because the obvious version of the project is a multi-month data platform build with a large number attached and no proof it will work. So the manual process continues, quietly costing more per year than the fix, and the decision keeps getting deferred to next quarter.
What the engagement delivers
- One recurring report, chosen with you for effort and visibility, automated from source to delivery
- The pipelines and warehouse models that report depends on, built to extend rather than as a one-off
- Scheduled delivery in the format your clients already receive
- Validation against the last few manual cycles until the numbers match
- A measured before-and-after on the analyst hours the process consumed
- Documentation and handover, plus a clear view of what the next report would take
How we work
Pick the report with the worst ratio of hours spent to judgment required
Build the ingestion and models it needs, sized so the next report reuses most of it
Run automated and manual in parallel until the output reconciles
Cut over, measure the time saved, and decide together whether to continue
Typical stack
Frequently asked questions
Because it proves the value with a small commitment, and the foundation is not wasted. The pipelines and models built for the first report cover most of what the next several need, so this is a genuine first phase rather than a throwaway pilot.
High frequency, multiple data sources, largely mechanical assembly, and visible to clients. Monthly cross-channel performance reports are the classic case. A report that is mostly strategic narrative is a poor candidate, since the work there is judgment, not assembly.
We baseline the current process before starting: who touches it, for how long, across a full cycle. After cutover we measure the same thing. If the saving is smaller than expected we report that number, because an honest result is what makes the next phase a real decision.
That is expected at first and it is one of the most useful outputs. Nearly every time, reconciliation uncovers a real error in the manual process, an inconsistent metric definition, or a platform restatement nobody was accounting for. We do not cut over until the difference is explained.
Go deeper
Automate one report first
Tell us which report costs your team the most hours and we will scope automating it at a fixed price.
Start a project