What is your repetitive work actually costing?
Move the sliders. The number on the right is what those hours are worth at your cost structure — and what is realistically recoverable with automation.
Based on 48 team-hours per week currently spent on repetitive work — 1k hours a year that could return to judgment work, customers, or simply not be worked.
A rough model, not a promise. Our workflow audit replaces estimates with measurements.
How we automate thisHow the estimate works
The model multiplies three inputs you know — team size, loaded hourly cost, and the hours each person spends on repetitive work — then applies the share you would realistically automate. We show a range because outcomes depend on the workflow: structured, rule-heavy work (data entry, triage, reporting, document handling) automates at the high end; judgment-heavy work does not, and should not, be automated at all.
The number is a conversation starter, not a quote. When we run a workflow audit we replace these assumptions with measurements from your actual tools — where the hours really go, which workflows carry the best savings-to-risk ratio, and what the first automation should be. The dashboard we leave behind keeps counting after we are done.
Two honest caveats. First, automation shifts work rather than deleting all of it: someone still reviews exceptions, and the calculator already prices that in at the conservative end of its range. Second, the recoverable share caps out well below 100% on purpose — teams that assume everything repetitive can be automated usually discover workflows with edge cases that genuinely need a human. When that happens to you, compare the human-only and third-way columns on our comparison page.