Fix the expensive bottleneck first.
Start where time, errors, or lost work cost the most.
Operating method
How It Works
We narrow the problem, prove the economics, and build the smallest useful system first.
Find the bottleneck. Fix only what matters.
We start with the highest-cost friction, prove the economics, and build only what the work requires.
Use existing software when it fits.
Set up the tools that already work. Build only what is unique.
Build custom where it creates an advantage.
Reserve custom work for the parts of your process that are genuinely different.
Measure what improves.
Success is less time and fewer errors—not more features.
How we evaluate a process before building anything.
Before recommending software, we map the current workflow and determine the smallest useful intervention.
Find the repeated handoff, delay, or error that costs the most.
Review what comes in, who handles it, and what needs to come out.
Estimate the time, missed work, and re-entry the current process creates.
Use existing software when it fits. Build only the missing part.
Stop spending expert time oncopy, paste, repeat.
Put skilled time back into customer work. Start with the repeat work that costs you most.
Process cost sheetDGC / 001
Example: manual quoting
Conservative operating estimate
- 3 people
- affected
- 5 hrs / week
- rework + entry
- $38 / hour
- loaded labor
Annual drag$0
Recover half the time:$0 / year
Before counting faster quotes, fewer errors, additional jobs handled, or the lower build cost AI makes possible.
What does manual work cost?
Estimate the recoverable labor tied up in one repeated workflow.
People × hours × rate × 50 weeks
Annual process drag$18,000
Potential annual capacity recovered$9,000
Monthly break-even ceiling$750
Directional estimate, not a magic number. We validate the assumptions before recommending a build.
Seeing a number worth fixing? Send us the process. We’ll find the smallest useful build.
Send this estimateWhat we need from your team.
You do not need a polished specification. We need enough real material to understand the work before we recommend a change.
Bring one real process
Show us where work gets delayed, repeated, or handed off.
Include the people closest to it
The people doing the work keep the solution grounded.
Share a useful example
A form, spreadsheet, quote, or screenshot helps us see the work quickly.
Helpful to have on hand
- A current form or spreadsheet
- A pricing sheet
- A few real requests or notes
- The output you want
Before we start, we make the next step clear.
Bring what you have. We will tell you what is useful, what is not, and whether the work is worth pursuing.
- One current form or spreadsheet
- A few recent requests or notes
- The outcome your team needs
Often no. Many problems are solved by setting up or connecting tools you already have. Custom is for the steps where your process is genuinely different.
AI-assisted development reduces build hours. The work still starts with your process and ends with a tool your team can use.
Yes. A focused first build is usually the best way to prove value and learn what should come next.
No. We aim to remove the friction around your tools, not force a migration you did not ask for.
Light but real involvement. Short feedback loops with the people who do the work keep the tool grounded and make adoption easier.
We test with real work, fix what the first weeks reveal, and improve the tool as the process settles in.
We compare the cost of the current process with the likely value of fixing it. If the economics do not work, we tell you.
Bring us the work still handled by hand.
We’ll find the smallest useful fix.
Start your build