Illustrative example · not a real client
段取り · A worked example

See a workflow, before and after.

The clearest way to understand what we do is to watch one workflow change shape. Below is a single example — accounts-payable invoice processing, a workflow nearly every operation runs — shown three ways: how it runs today across several disconnected systems, the preparation that changes it, and how a prepared agent crew runs it once the routine work is carried for you and people keep control of the decisions that matter. It isn't a real client, and all system names are shown by role; it's here to make the method concrete.

Today
The mess
→
The eight-tenths
Preparation
→
Ideal state
Prepared agent
BeforePrepareAfterTake the one-pager
Before · how one invoice moves today

The work isn't hard. It's carried entirely by people.

In this example, a single invoice is checked and paid by a person moving data across four or five systems that don't talk to each other. Every step is manual, and every handoff is a place to wait or mis-key.

01
Intake
Multiple inboxescapture app, AP mailbox, direct email→reads by handNo single queuethree intake paths
02
Vendor & PO check
Clerk looks up vendor& matching PO→re-keysERPvendors, POs, contracts
03
Verify details
Clerk matches linesqty, price, totals, tax→Manual cross-checkslow & error-prone
04
Budget check
Clerk checks budgetcost center, budget ID→re-keysBudgeting toolseparate system→Missing ID?email IT, wait
05
Approval
Enter in approval systemroute by authority level→waitsApprover's queuesits until reviewed
06
Pay, close & file
Clerk pays, closes PO& uploads the record→re-keysERP + doc storetwo more systems
Four+ systems, no bridge

ERP, expense/approval, budgeting, document store — a person is the only link between them.

Line-by-line by hand

Quantities, prices, and totals are matched manually against the PO — slow, and easy to miss.

Approvals stall

Invoices wait in an approver's queue with no prioritization and no audit of who did what.

Data re-keyed repeatedly

The same invoice data is typed into intake, ERP, budgeting, and the document store.

Prepare · the eight-tenths nobody did

Nothing here needs a smarter model. It needs preparation.

The whole difference is in five questions — the tolerances, the match rules, and the escalation path agreed before any building starts, and, under the 30-Day Proof, proven on the real work before a build fee is owed.

The five questions that turn “before” into “after”
  • 1 · Trigger — What starts the work, and which system holds the real record? → Invoices arrive by capture app, mailbox, and direct email; the ERP holds the true vendor, PO, and contract.
  • 2 · Read — What must be understood, and where does it live? → Vendor, PO number, line items, totals, tax, payment terms — extracted from any invoice format.
  • 3 · Rules — What decides the outcome, and what must a person always approve? → Exact-match quantities & unit price, 2% tolerance on discrepancies; any mismatch or failed check → a person.
  • 4 · Act — What happens, in which systems, and what's logged? → Validate against the ERP, assemble the approval package, close the PO, file the record — every step logged.
  • 5 · Close — What does “done right” look like, and who owns it? → Approved invoices paid within terms, with a full audit trail; the AP lead owns “correct.”
After · a prepared agent crew

The agent crew carries the routine. People keep control.

Once prepared, the routine work is carried by a small crew of single-purpose agents — each doing one bounded, checkable task in sequence. Anything that fails a check, or needs judgment, routes to a person. Every payment is approved by a manager.

Agent 1 · Extract the key fields
Reads the invoice in any format and pulls structured data — parties, line items, totals, payment terms.
Agent 2 · Validate the vendor
Looks the vendor up in the ERP and compares it against the PO vendor; flags mismatches.
Agent 3 · Verify the PO reference
Confirms the PO number exists in the system and retrieves its details.
Agent 4 · Cross-check line items
Matches quantities and unit prices against the PO, within the agreed 2% tolerance.
Agent 5 · Audit the financials
Recalculates subtotals, tax, and totals, and compares them to the invoice values.
Agent 6 · Coordinate the decision
Aggregates every check into one verdict: approved for payment, or requires review.
Decision router
All checks pass → assemble the approval package. Any check fails → route to a person, with a plain summary of exactly what failed and how to fix it.
The human path
A person decides every failed or out-of-tolerance case — and a manager approves every payment. The agent assembles the case and the report; a person always says yes.
Control point · a manager approves every payment; failed checks always go to a person
On approval · finish the routine work
Generates a clear report and a manager-ready email, then — on the yes — closes the PO in the ERP and files the record, logging every action.
People keep oversight
Can review the full audit trail and reverse anything; own what “correct” means and tune the rules over time.
Take it with you

Three ways to take this with you.

Show a colleague the finished story as a one-page PDF, take the completed map on a single page, or download the blank worksheet and start mapping one of your own workflows.

The story — one-pager (PDF)
Before → prepare → after · a finished invoice-processing example · not a real client
Download the story (PDF) →
The map — one page (PDF)
The completed workflow map, at a glance · each step, its systems, pain & decisions
Download the map (PDF) →
The blank worksheet (Excel)
Fill-in template · same instructions & entry fields · map your own workflow, systems & rules
Download the worksheet (Excel) →
Want to try it on your own work?

This is exactly what the first stage of a 30-Day Proof produces — your workflow mapped, your rules written, your success line agreed. See how the proof works.

How the 30-Day Proof works →

Prefer to map one yourself?

Our field guide walks you through choosing the right first workflow — with a ten-question self-check to grade any candidate before you commit.

Choose your first workflow →