Get to a stronger draft.
Try: turn an approved brief into email variants, product copy or a campaign outline.
Check: factual claims, prices, specifications, originality and voice. More versions do not prove better performance; measure the response.
02 / AI workflow check
Your team needs useful work completed, not more drafts to review. I use a simple test: does the finished work meet your standard, and does the whole process leave you better off?
Choose one repeatable task. Time your current process and an AI-assisted version through to a result you would actually approve. Include research, prompting, fact checks, corrections and handoffs. The starting numbers below are a hypothetical example, not a performance benchmark.
Example: 300 minutes saved across 20 tasks, with 120 minutes of setup.
After setup: 5.0 hours saved per month at the same volume.
Setup is recovered after 8 tasks.
At $50 per hour, 0.6 hours of recovered capacity has the same modeled value as the $30 monthly software cost.
Capacity is not cash in the bank. The dollar figures price the time difference at your hourly cost, then subtract added software costs. Payroll does not fall just because a task takes less time. A cash saving requires an actual reduction in spending; more profit requires a separate business outcome.
Your inputs and results stay in this browser. They are not submitted or saved. With JavaScript disabled, the results show the hypothetical example only.
Recurring hours recovered = (current minutes − AI workflow minutes) × tasks per month ÷ 60.
First-month hours recovered = recurring hours recovered − setup minutes ÷ 60.
Modeled capacity value = hours recovered × loaded hourly cost − additional monthly software cost. Negative hours mean the workflow takes more time. Negative dollar values mean the modeled capacity does not cover the added costs.
Setup recovery = setup minutes ÷ minutes saved per task, rounded up to a whole task. This measures time recovery only; it excludes software costs. The model assumes task volume, time and cost remain consistent. It does not forecast revenue, account for tax, or put a price on errors.
The part worth getting right
I would agree on the finish line before testing the tool. Otherwise, your team can end up comparing an approved piece of work with a promising first draft.
Write down what “ready to use” means. For a product page: accurate specifications, supported claims, your brand voice and a clear next step for the customer.
Use a small set of representative tasks, including a difficult one. Compare both methods against the same standard. Record first-pass acceptance, correction time and critical errors.
Name what your team will do with the capacity: follow up with customers, improve a product page or clear an overdue backlog. Assign someone to check whether that actually happens.
Where I would test it
These are candidates for a controlled test. The useful question is what your team can finish better or faster—not how many AI features you can switch on.
Try: turn an approved brief into email variants, product copy or a campaign outline.
Check: factual claims, prices, specifications, originality and voice. More versions do not prove better performance; measure the response.
Try: structure approved CRM notes into a summary, open questions and next actions.
Check: customer details against the source. Do not let an invented promise, qualification or appointment enter your workflow.
Try: turn an approved process into a location checklist, event run sheet or training outline.
Check: local requirements, timing, responsibilities and exceptions. Someone who knows the operation owns the final version.
Optional analytics help us understand what’s useful. Optional session recordings show how the site is used, with form entries masked. Choose either, both, or neither. Privacy details.
Your browser’s privacy signal is active. Optional measurement stays off.