What are we doing with AI, and what has it saved?
For COOs and heads of operations at organisations of 50 to 500 people, and at multi-site groups such as clinic groups, franchises and property portfolios.
The question you are asked
iSystematic works with operations leaders who are asked what the organisation is doing with AI, and what it has saved. An honest answer needs a baseline taken before anything is built, and a record of who approved each system.
Where most start
Most start with the Automation Assessment: two weeks, fixed fee, ten candidate tasks scored on frequency, effort, data sensitivity and risk, three recommended solutions, and a baseline measurement plan.
A different start fits two cases. Healthcare groups touching patient information take the same Assessment with a privacy review of each candidate task before design. If a board is asking whether AI is under control, the readiness route goes first.
What we deliver
One path, and you can stop after any step.
Assessment
Two weeks. Ten candidate tasks scored, three recommended solutions with their levels, and a baseline measurement plan.
Pilot
Six weeks. One solution live for one team, measured before and after: task time including review, acceptance, corrections, escalations, duplicates, failures and cost. See Pilot.
Build
The solution in production with its gate records. Scoped after the pilot.
AgentOps
Monthly: monitoring, evaluation re-runs, vendor and model change checks, a monthly note, and retirement of unused agents. See AgentOps.
The solutions an Assessment most often points to
Each solution is an offer, not a case study. All are proposed until a documented pilot exists.
Leadership Briefing Desk
A dated daily or weekly briefing from approved sources, every item traced to its source.
Front Door Agent
One front door across email, web chat, WhatsApp and forms: answers from approved sources, drafts the rest, escalates what needs a person.
Intake to Onboarding
Lists what is missing, prepares the onboarding pack, and opens tasks after approval.
Meeting-to-Action Operations
Turns consented recordings or notes into decisions, owners and dates; tasks are created after approval.
Receivables Assistant
Reminders for confirmed unpaid invoices only, with exact amounts; disputed or paid items blocked.
Board and Committee Pack Preparation
Collects approved inputs, checks completeness against the agenda, and drafts the cover summary with a source map.
What you hold at the end: a fictional sample
This fictional extract from an Automation Assessment report is for a fictional clinic group with five sites.
| Candidate task | How often | Effort | Data sensitivity | Risk | Recommendation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Answering repeat patient questions across five sites | Daily | High | Patient information | Medium | S3 Front Door Agent, after a privacy review |
| Weekly site operations briefing for the COO | Weekly | Medium | Business confidential | Low | S1 Leadership Briefing Desk |
| Chasing missing intake forms | Daily | Medium | Patient information | Medium | S4 Intake to Onboarding |
| Assembling the monthly board pack | Monthly | High | Business confidential | Medium | Not yet: the inputs have no named owners |
Fictional. A full report scores ten tasks and adds the level for each recommendation and a baseline measurement plan.
One gate record, fictional
This fictional approval record is for the briefing desk recommended above.
| Field | Entry |
|---|---|
| Gate | G3 Approval |
| System | Leadership briefing for a fictional clinic group |
| Named approver | The chief operating officer |
| Evidence relied on | The G2 validation report, the approved source register, and the spend cap with its log |
| Decision | Approved for one team, with a review date |
What it is built on
Every solution passes through the same lifecycle and leaves the same records, so a later governance review finds what it looks for. The full stack is on How we build, and the method in full is in the books.
| Framework | In this work | You keep |
|---|---|---|
| Five-Gate Deployment Model™ | Every system moves through five gates, from G1 Data and Design to G5 Operation, each signed by a named person. | Five gate records, each naming a person and the evidence relied on |
| BOE Declaration | Each control is declared as its boundary, its optimiser and the evidence that it held. | One BOE Declaration per control |
Buying from us
You contract with iSystematic Inc., in Canada. Build work is delivered by the studio's team of 10+ expert builders; enterprise readiness work is led by Nabeel Khan personally.
First steps, such as the Automation Assessment and a Pilot, are fixed fees, shared on a short call. A build is scoped after the pilot, and AgentOps is monthly.
What the research says
These are published studies, not our results. Ours will come from documented pilots.
758 Boston Consulting Group consultants in total, in a preregistered experiment, randomly assigned to no AI, GPT-4, or GPT-4 with a prompt-engineering overview. These figures come from the 385 who worked on 18 realistic consulting tasks inside the AI's capability, such as developing new product ideas.
The gains held only for tasks inside the AI's capability. On a task outside it, consultants using AI were less likely to be correct (E3b). One firm, GPT-4 as it was in 2023, and a working paper.
Dell'Acqua et al., Harvard Business School working paper, 2023 ↗16 experienced developers, with about five years on their projects, working 246 real issues in their own mature repositories; each issue was randomly assigned to AI allowed or not allowed. The main tools were Cursor Pro with Claude 3.5 and 3.7 Sonnet, February to June 2025.
Early-2025 tools, and expert users on familiar, complex work. METR says the result does not show that AI fails to speed up most developers. In February 2026 METR gave the 95% confidence interval as 2% to 39% slower, said developers are likely more sped up now, and said its newer data give an unreliable signal because developers opted out of working without AI.
METR (Becker, Rush, Barnes and Rein), 2025 ↗Published studies, not our results. Ours will come from documented pilots.
Start
Start with the Assessment, or tell us what you are being asked and one form routes you.
Where to go next
Customer service
Customer-service leaders: iSystematic pilots a bilingual front door on one queue for six weeks, measured in your own terms against a baseline taken first.
Compliance and procurement
Compliance and procurement leads: run the AVRF vendor questionnaire yourself for free, run it with iSystematic, or govern the AI programme through readiness.
Municipalities
Municipalities: iSystematic starts with a staff AI-use policy or an Automation Assessment, then prepares council packages and resident answers you approve.
Automation Assessment
iSystematic's Automation Assessment: two weeks, a fixed fee, ten candidate tasks scored, three recommended solutions and a plan to measure the baseline.
Pilot
iSystematic's Pilot puts one solution live for one team for six weeks, measured against a baseline from day one: the only route to a published result.
AgentOps
AgentOps from iSystematic: monthly monitoring, evaluation re-runs, vendor and model change checks, a monthly note, and retirement of agents nobody uses.
Conformance is self-declared; no regulator endorses this work.
Start with a baseline
Ten tasks scored and measured before anything is built.