Skip to content

What could automating one workflow save you?

Model a transparent range for capacity a repetitive task might release. This is a scenario, not a forecast: every coefficient, limitation, and editable assumption is shown beside the result.

Use a value from 0 to 500.

Use a value from 0 to 60.

Example only: wage plus employer taxes, benefits, and overhead you can document.

Starts at 46: 52 calendar weeks minus 6 for leave and holidays. Change it to fit.

Planning scenario, not promised savings.

The range applies observed 12% to 40% time/capacity effects to your inputs. The studies covered specific support and writing tasks, not your workflow; a $0 result is possible.

28 to 92
hours of capacity / year
$1,130 to $3,680
value of capacity / year
12 to 39 wk
scenario to offset the $950 assessment

Dollar values assume reclaimed time can actually be redeployed at the loaded hourly cost. They are not cash savings, revenue, or a guarantee.

Assumptions and dated sources

Nothing here is unlocked by an email. The task choice labels your scenario; it does not change the range because these studies do not support separate automation percentages for each category.

  • Lower anchor: Brynjolfsson, Li & Raymond, Generative AI at Work (November 2023): 14% more issues resolved per hour across 5,179 support agents; converted here to about 12% less time at the same output.
  • Upper anchor: Noy & Zhang, Science 381(6654) (July 2023): 40% less completion time across 453 professionals doing bounded writing tasks.
  • Time basis: 46 working weeks is your editable input; the 46 week starting value is arithmetic (52 minus 6), not a workforce benchmark.

Want a copy of the scenario and a practical next step?

The assumptions and sources are already above. No email required. If you want, I'll send the scenario and the first workflow question I'd investigate. A few short messages after that; one click unsubscribes.

Prefer to just talk? Book a free call.