AI consulting + automation · Perth, WA
We tell you what is actually happening in your business.
An assessment that maps how your operation really runs, where the money and time go, and what is worth changing. What we build afterwards comes out of what it finds.
Start with a free consultation
Built on
The assessment
Where it starts
Before we recommend anything, we look at how your business actually runs. Systems, workflows, where work gets stuck, where it gets done twice.
You get a written assessment: the highest-value opportunities we can see, what each would cost to implement, and what the return looks like on your numbers. It is yours to keep and specific enough to act on with or without us.
The assessment is a paid engagement, scoped to your business. The conversation that scopes it is free.
What the assessment covers
- Step 1
Systems and workflow review
We look at your current systems, workflows and data sources to find where automation would help, and where it wouldn't.
- Step 2
Implementation plan
A plain-language outline of what we'd build and how it fits into your existing stack.
- Step 3
ROI estimate
Time saved and cost recovered, worked out from your own numbers rather than industry averages.
- Step 4
Fixed quote
A clear build timeline and an upfront cost, so you can weigh the decision properly.
Why workflows first
The problem usually isn't AI
It's the re-typing, the chasing, the "wait until Monday". Those habits feel like a cost of doing business, until you count them.
So we start with how work moves through your systems, not with a tool, and only add AI where it has something real to work with.
A Monday morning, now
Illustrative- 8:05Re-type the weekend's invoices into Xero90 min
- 9:40Chase last week's unanswered quotes45 min
- 11:00Assemble the weekly numbers by hand2 hrs
- 4:30Answer "did that order ship?" emails40 min
Half the day, gone to double handling.
The same Monday, after
- Invoices read and drafted overnight, waiting on a quick approval
- Quote follow-ups already sent, logged against each customer
- The weekly report waiting in your inbox at 7:00am
- Order status answered by the assistant, from live data
Twenty minutes of approvals, then the real work.
What we do
What we build from it
These are the four things assessments most often lead to. Which of them apply to you, if any, is the question the assessment answers.
Custom workflow automation
One job, four systems, half a day gone
The task where someone opens the accounting system, the inventory system, the carrier portal and a spreadsheet, and types the same details into each. We collapse it into one screen and one entry. Nothing sends without a human sign-off.
System integration and reporting
Nobody can answer a simple question without an export and a pivot table
Your data sits in the tools that hold it, so every question turns into a spreadsheet exercise. We bring it into one place and put an assistant on top of it. Someone asks in plain English, and gets the answer off live data.
Exception detection and alerting
You find out about problems too late
The order that never shipped, the invoice that was overcharged, the stock that quietly ran out. Rules that watch the numbers and flag what needs a decision, on the day it happens rather than at month end.
Bespoke AI applications
The tool you need does not exist
Where the off-the-shelf option does not fit the way you work, we build the internal tool around your workflow and your data, not a generic template.
Proof, not promises
The first tab is the deliverable: a sample assessment, written for a fictional business so you can read what you would actually receive. The rest are working examples of the kinds of systems assessments lead to, running on sample data. Click around.
The deliverable itself
A redacted sample of the written assessment, prepared for a fictional business. This is the document an engagement starts with: what we found, what fixing it costs, and what we would leave alone.
Scroll the document. It reads the way the real one does.
Sample assessment
A redacted sample of the written deliverable. The business is fictional and every figure is illustrative
Operations assessment
Harwick Joinery Pty Ltd
Prepared by: MyBizz Solutions
Status: Sample document, fictional business
Scope: Quoting, job costing, invoicing, purchasing
Figures: Illustrative only
1. The business
Harwick Joinery is an invented commercial joinery workshop of 14 people: two directors, two estimators, a bookkeeper, and nine on the floor. Work arrives by email and phone, is quoted from Word templates, tracked in a spreadsheet job register, and invoiced from Xero. Suppliers are ordered from two trade portals and a phone call.
Systems in use
- Xero for accounting, kept current, bank reconciliation done weekly
- Spreadsheet job register, maintained by one director
- Word templates for quotes, one per estimator
- Timesheets on a shared spreadsheet, entered weekly
- Two supplier trade portals, no order history export in use
2. Where the time and money go
Across the fortnight we observed, the pattern was consistent. The estimators spend roughly nine hours a week each assembling quotes. The bookkeeper spends most of Tuesday reconciling job costs that closed weeks earlier. Invoice follow-up happens in bursts. None of this is unusual for a workshop at this size. The question is which parts are worth fixing, and in what order.
3. Opportunities, in order of return
3.1 · Quoting assembled by hand from old jobs
Illustrative- What it is
- Each estimator builds quotes by copying a previous job that looks similar, then adjusting line items from memory. Two estimators keep separate price spreadsheets that no longer agree with each other.
- Why it happens
- There is no single price list. Material costs live in supplier invoices, labour rates live in payroll, and neither feeds the quoting templates.
- What fixing it involves
- A structured price list maintained in one place, fed by supplier invoice data already entering Xero, with quotes generated from it and reviewed by the estimator before anything is sent.
Indicative build cost: $8,000 to $11,000
Indicative payback: About seven months, on the hours currently spent assembling and correcting quotes.
3.2 · Job costing runs three weeks behind
Illustrative- What it is
- Actual hours and material costs are reconciled against the quote long after the job closes. Loss-making jobs are found, not caught.
- Why it happens
- Hours sit in a timesheet spreadsheet, materials sit in Xero bills, and the job register is a third spreadsheet. Someone has to bring the three together by hand.
- What fixing it involves
- A nightly feed from Xero and the timesheet into a single job ledger, with each job showing quoted against actual while the job is still open.
Indicative build cost: $10,000 to $14,000
Indicative payback: About ten months. The margin catch is the larger part of the return and is harder to state precisely.
3.3 · Invoice follow-up depends on who remembers
Illustrative- What it is
- Overdue invoices are chased when the bookkeeper has a quiet afternoon. The average time to payment drifts out when the workshop is busy, which is exactly when cash matters.
- Why it happens
- Nothing watches the receivables ledger. Follow-up is a task in someone's head, not a process.
- What fixing it involves
- Scheduled reminders drafted from the Xero ledger, held for a person to approve before anything sends.
Indicative build cost: $3,500 to $5,000
Indicative payback: About five months, on bookkeeper hours alone. Faster payment is additional but not counted here.
4. Considered and not recommended
AI phone answering for inbound enquiries
The workshop takes around six enquiry calls a day and the office manager answers them between other work. The technology would handle the calls, but at this volume it saves under two hours a week and adds a system to maintain. It does not pay for itself here. If enquiry volume doubles, revisit.
5. Already working well
Xero is in good order: bills are entered promptly and the bank reconciliation is current, which is what makes most of the opportunities above buildable at all. The whiteboard delivery schedule is often the first thing consultants want to replace. At this scale it works, everyone trusts it, and we recommend leaving it alone.
This is a sample prepared for a fictional business to show the shape of the deliverable. Names, systems and every figure are invented. A real assessment is written against your operation and your numbers.
How we engage
Three phases, and you can stop after any of them
Assessment
1–2 weeksWe sit with your team and map how work actually moves: where the hours go, what gets re-typed, what waits on someone. You get a blueprint with the maths done on your own numbers.
Build
2–8 weeksWe build the integrations, automations and AI tooling the blueprint justified, inside the tools you already run. A fixed quote before we start, and a working demo every week.
Support
Ongoing · optionalWe keep it healthy, train your team, and step back as they take over. Month to month, and everything keeps running without us.
No surprises: a fixed quote before any build, working software demoed weekly, and you own the code, the accounts and the IP. There's no lock-in, and you can stop after any phase.
Where the hours come back
The usual first wins
We don't publish average savings figures, because every business is different. These are the jobs we most often automate first, and where the hours tend to come back.
Invoice chasing
Overdue reminders and payment follow-ups go out on schedule, instead of when someone remembers.
Quote and enquiry follow-ups
Every enquiry and open quote gets a timely follow-up, logged against the customer record.
Weekly reporting
The numbers your Monday meeting needs, pulled together automatically, without anyone building another spreadsheet.
What that's worth depends on your numbers. Working it out on yours is part of the assessment. And whatever you send us, we reply within one business day.
What it is costing you is specific to you
Manual admin has a real cost, but it is not the same in any two businesses. Working out what yours actually is, on your numbers rather than industry averages, is what the assessment does.
Who does the work
“If automation isn't the right call, we'll tell you. We'd rather lose the line item than sell you something that won't earn its keep.”
Oliver Kemp & Alexander ScafidasCo-founders, MyBizz Solutions
Let's talk
Tell us what's slowing your business down and we'll reply within one business day.
Step 1 of 3
Who are you?
Common questions
More detail on how AI consulting, automation, reporting, and implementation work in practice.
An AI consultant helps identify where AI can create real operational value inside a business, then works through how that should actually be implemented. That can include analysing processes, identifying automation opportunities, improving access to internal information, designing AI-enabled workflows, or helping shape a broader implementation roadmap. The useful version of AI consulting is not theoretical. It is tied to practical constraints like systems, data quality, staff workflows, reporting requirements, and business priorities. The goal is to turn AI from a general idea into something that improves speed, consistency, visibility, or decision-making in a measurable way.
Workflow automation reduces manual work by removing repetitive handoffs, duplicate data entry, avoidable approvals, spreadsheet chasing, and routine process steps that do not need human effort every time. In practice, that might mean automating invoice handling, internal notifications, reporting tasks, onboarding steps, document movement, or updates between systems. The effect is usually more than just time saved. It also improves consistency, reduces process delays, and lowers the risk of manual error. Good workflow automation should fit the way the business already operates while making the process faster and easier to manage.
Yes. In many cases the most effective solution is not replacing everything, but integrating into the systems already being used. That can involve connecting data sources, moving information between platforms, triggering actions across systems, or building interfaces that sit over the top of existing tools. Data integration matters because automation and reporting are much weaker when information is trapped in separate places. Once systems are connected, reporting can sit on top of them: operational and performance information brought into one place, so management sees what is actually happening without stitching spreadsheets together. A good implementation approach looks at what is already in use, what needs to stay, what needs to connect, and where the biggest friction points sit before deciding how the final system should be structured.
Usually not. Many businesses can improve operations significantly by layering AI implementation, workflow automation, or reporting logic into the tools and systems they already use. The better path is often to work with the existing stack first, identify the process bottlenecks, and then decide where new functionality is actually required. In some situations a bespoke application or new system makes sense, but that should come from the business need rather than from forcing unnecessary change. The objective is a cleaner and more effective operating model, not extra complexity.
Processes are usually strong candidates for automation when they are repetitive, rules-based, high-volume, time-sensitive, or dependent on moving information between people and systems. Common examples include invoice workflows, recurring reporting, internal approvals, onboarding processes, document routing, task notifications, status updates, and manual reconciliation steps. The best opportunities often sit in areas that feel small individually but create constant operational drag over time. Once these are identified properly, workflow automation can remove large amounts of low-value manual work and create much more reliable process flow.
Implementation time depends on the scope, the systems involved, and whether the work is focused on one contained process or a broader operational redesign. A simple automation or reporting improvement can move much faster than a full AI-enabled workflow or bespoke internal platform. The main driver is usually not the technology alone, but the complexity of the process, the quality of the underlying data, and how many systems need to connect. The right approach is to define the use case clearly, reduce ambiguity early, and build in a way that delivers practical value as quickly as possible.
We are not tied to one platform. Part of the assessment is working out which model or tool actually fits the job, whether that is Claude, GPT, an open-source model, or in plenty of cases no AI at all. Some processes are better served by straightforward automation or integration, and recommending the simplest thing that works is the point of being independent. Whatever we build, you own the accounts, the code and the IP, so you are never locked to a vendor through us.