Stop paying people to copy-paste between systems
I take a manual process and wrap it in automation that runs every day — and fails loudly, not silently.
Common signs you need help
- The same data gets entered in three different places every day
- A broken Zap costs you a day before anyone notices
- Your "process" is a spreadsheet someone updates when they remember
Who this is for
This is for businesses where the same fact gets typed by a human more than once a day. Job details entered into the field app and again into accounting. A customer address updated in the CRM but not in the job tool. A weekly export-and-import routine that one person maintains and nobody else understands. If your team can name the spreadsheet that holds the business together, this is the page.
Where this applies
Field teams and back-office staff lose hours re-keying the same job data — automation should fail loudly, not silently.
Integration flows between CRMs, accounting, and job management tools.
What the assessment covers
Trace where work stalls between tools and people
Identify quick wins vs. deeper integration work
A working sample of the fix within two business days, on demo data
A build, end to end
A first build often looks like this: an accepted quote currently triggers four separate manual steps, each done by a different person, and nobody notices when one is missed until the month-end reconciliation.
- Trace one real job end to end and write down every point where a human re-types something a system already knows.
- Decide which system owns each field, so the sync has a defensible answer when two records disagree.
- Build the flow: accepted quote creates the draft invoice with correct line items and tracking category, moves the CRM deal, and sends the customer a scheduling link.
- Add loud failure — if any step fails, someone gets an alert immediately rather than discovering it weeks later.
Outcome: Four manual steps become one, and the failure mode changes from silent and expensive to visible and same-day.
What I build
Order-to-invoice flows, CRM syncs, approval chains, alert systems
A first build often looks like this: an accepted quote in the job-management tool creates a draft invoice in Xero with the correct line items and tracking category, updates the CRM deal stage, and sends the customer a scheduling link. Four manual steps become one, and if any part fails, someone gets an alert rather than discovering it at month end. Others include two-way contact sync with explicit field ownership, approval chains that route by dollar value, and overdue-invoice sequences using your wording.
Manual handoffs against an automated flow
| Manual handoff today | After the build | |
|---|---|---|
| Data entry | Same job details typed into two or three systems | Entered once, propagated by the flow |
| When something breaks | Found at month end, if at all | Alert on the day, with the record that failed |
| Who holds the process | One person who knows the spreadsheet | Written scope and documentation you keep |
| Adding a step | Another instruction nobody reads | A change to the flow, applied everywhere at once |
Data entry
- Manual handoff today:
- Same job details typed into two or three systems
- After the build:
- Entered once, propagated by the flow
When something breaks
- Manual handoff today:
- Found at month end, if at all
- After the build:
- Alert on the day, with the record that failed
Who holds the process
- Manual handoff today:
- One person who knows the spreadsheet
- After the build:
- Written scope and documentation you keep
Adding a step
- Manual handoff today:
- Another instruction nobody reads
- After the build:
- A change to the flow, applied everywhere at once
What it costs and how I scope it
It starts with a free 30-minute call where you walk me through how one real job moves from enquiry to paid invoice, and I mark where work waits or gets re-keyed. You get a working sample of the fix for the worst of those, on demo data, within two business days. The build is a fixed price from $2,500 with the scope written down, including what is explicitly out. One automation usually takes about two weeks; work that spans several systems is scoped separately as a bigger project.
Every fix starts with a free 30-minute call and a free working sample, so you know the fixed price before work begins. Bigger projects get a paid Opportunities Report first.
When this is the wrong fix
Automating a broken process makes the mess move faster. If nobody can state who approves what, or two systems are both treated as authoritative for the same field, the integration will create conflicts worse than the manual work it replaced. In those cases I recommend the process work first, which is often cheaper and sometimes removes the need for the build entirely. Very low-frequency tasks are also poor candidates — a monthly annoyance rarely repays an integration.
FAQ
- Do you only use one automation platform?
- No. I pick the stack that fits — Make, n8n, custom code, or your existing tools' native automation.
- What if my systems are old?
- That's common. I design around what you have and flag when a replacement would pay off.
Got a process you've outgrown?
Show me on a free 30-minute call. You'll see a working sample of the fix within two business days, before you pay a cent.
Book my free 30-minute call