- Sheridan, Wyoming, US
- [email protected]
- Call Us Anytime+123 (4567) 890
- Email Us[email protected]
- Opening HourMon - Sat 8:00 - 6:30, Sunday - CLOSED
Get latest update for our trusted applications
Business Impact
The numbers our clients kept.
Every figure on this page comes from a value model agreed before the work started, measured against a baseline someone in finance verified. Where a holdout group was possible, the improvement is incremental rather than observed. Nothing here is a projection.
$1.7B
generatedCumulative client value across the portfolio
70%
efficiencyAverage operational efficiency gain
120+
projectsEach with a signed value model
$1.7B
Client value generatedRevenue created and cost removed
120+
Projects deliveredShipped, adopted and measured
217
Team membersEngineers, scientists, designers, analysts
7
CountriesDelivery and client presence
30
PartnersCloud, AI, data and implementation
99%
Client retentionContinuing after project one
Impact claims are cheap. The methodology is what matters.
Any firm can publish percentages. The question worth asking is what the percentage is measured against, who agreed the baseline, and whether the improvement would have happened anyway. Most impact pages cannot answer those three questions, which is why most impact pages should be ignored.
Ours can. Each number below traces to a named metric in a value model, a baseline verified with the client's finance function before work began, and monthly reporting afterwards. Where we could hold back a control group, the figure is incremental — the improvement that did not happen to the group we left alone.
We also keep the failures. Two engagements in our history did not reach their target, and in both cases a portion of our fee was forfeited under the outcome agreement. That is what makes the rest of the page worth reading.
We had bought software before. This was the first time we bought an outcome and actually received it.
Demand captured instead of lost.
The largest single value line in most of our engagements, and the one clients consistently underestimate before we measure it.
+60%
conversionQualified applicant conversion, lending platform
+75%
lead volumeLead generation, property operations client
+38%
recovered demandEnquiries saved from unanswered calls
+27%
revived pipelineStalled deals recovered by follow-up agents
+23%
offer conversionNext-best-action ranking in financial services
+22%
utilisationField team capacity from intelligent dispatch
Spending that stopped, and stayed stopped.
Recurring savings are worth more than one-off gains, so we prioritise structural cost removal over efficiency drives that decay.
−54%
per interactionCost per customer interaction, voice AI
−41%
cloud spendMedian saving after architecture review
−82%
handling timeDocument-heavy intake and review work
−73%
reporting effortManual report preparation hours removed
−62%
pipeline costAfter re-engineering inherited data jobs
−19%
retention spendDiscounting stopped for customers who stay
Losses that did not occur.
The hardest lever to measure and frequently the most valuable — waste, downtime, attrition, safety and regulatory exposure.
−34%
scrapWaste reduction from inline vision inspection
−31%
churnAttrition reduction from decision policy
−58%
recovery timeMean time to recovery under our SRE practice
99.95%
uptimeAvailability across platforms we operate
100%
auditableAutomated decisions logged and replayable
0
escalationsClient AI incidents escalated to a regulator
Speed, where speed is competitive advantage.
In every competitive market we have worked in, responding first has been worth more than responding better.
4 days → 4 hrs
underwritingTurnaround on credit decisions
2 days → 4 min
enquiry responseFirst response to inbound enquiries
11 hrs
per personWeekly hours returned to client teams
9 days
faster closeMonth-end financial reporting cycle
−71%
onboardingCustomer onboarding cycle time
18x
release rateDeployment frequency after CI/CD rebuild
How each number on this page was produced.
STEP 01
Baseline before build
The current-state figure is measured and verified with the client's finance or operations function before any work begins. Estimated baselines are marked as estimates and used only where measurement was genuinely impossible.
STEP 02
Holdout where possible
Wherever statistically viable a control group is excluded from the intervention, so the reported improvement is incremental rather than coincident with market movement or seasonality.
STEP 03
Reported monthly, signed annually
Value is reported every month against the baseline and reviewed formally with the accountable client executive. Figures quoted publicly are those the client has confirmed.
Fair challenges to an impact page.
- 01. Why are the clients not named?Most of these figures sit inside commercial and competitive sensitivity. Named references are provided during procurement, and several clients will speak to prospective clients directly. We would rather be vague publicly than exaggerate.
- 02. How is the $1.7B figure calculated?It is the sum of measured value across delivered engagements — revenue created plus cost removed plus quantified risk reduction — using each engagement's agreed value model. It is cumulative rather than annual, and we do not count projected future benefit.
- 03. Do you count value the client would have achieved anyway?Not where a holdout was possible. Where it was not, we discount the reported figure and document the assumption. This makes our numbers smaller than they could be, which is the point.
- 04. What about the projects that failed?Two engagements missed their targets and we forfeited part of our fee in both. We discuss them openly in procurement conversations, because how a partner behaves when a number does not move is more informative than how they behave when it does.
Where to go next.
Ask us to produce a number like these for your business.
A two-week value assessment identifies which of the four levers applies to you, quantifies the opportunity and commits to a measurable target.
