Operating partners, COOs, CFOs, and technology leaders deciding where software and AI should take over manual work.
Much of a company's work still moves by hand: records re-keyed between systems, spreadsheet reconciliations, approvals chased by email, and workarounds for tools that fall short. Cerenovus rebuilds each process from the records the work leaves behind and marks the manual steps and the waits around them. Your team gets ranked automation cases, each sized and linked to its source.
Questions this review answers
The questions management asks before committing budget to automation, answered from how the work actually runs rather than how it is described.
- 01
Which steps are still done by hand, and how many hours do they take?
- 02
Where does work wait on approvals that someone chases by email?
- 03
Which workarounds exist only because a tool no longer does its job?
- 04
Which steps suit software, which suit AI, and which should stay with people?
What Cerenovus typically finds
Manual work rarely shows up in a system inventory or a process document. It shows up in the records, and in how long work sits between them.
Re-keying between systems
The same order, invoice, or customer record typed into two or three systems by hand. Cerenovus matches the entries across systems and counts how often it happens and in which team.
Spreadsheet reconciliations
Weekly or monthly reconciliations rebuilt in spreadsheets because two systems disagree. Tracing each file to the systems it pulls from shows where the mismatch starts and how many hours go into closing it.
Approvals chased by email
Sign-offs that live in inboxes instead of a system, kept moving by reminders. Cerenovus measures how often the answer is simply yes, and how long orders or invoices sit while they wait.
Workarounds for tools that fall short
Side spreadsheets, shared inboxes, and manual exports that fill a gap a system leaves. Cerenovus links each workaround to the tool behind it and to any fix that stalled.
Automations built but never switched on
Tickets and project files often show integrations, scripts, or bots that were built or bought, then left unused while staff kept doing the same work by hand.
Steps that should stay with people
Cerenovus marks the steps that need judgment, such as credit exceptions or pricing disputes, so each case states what software would handle and what still needs a person.
5 steps from question to decision
Scope runs from a single process to the whole company. The aim is a ranked list of automation cases within about a week of read-only access.
- 01
Agree on the processes and sources in scope
- 02
Map each process as it actually runs
- 03
Mark manual steps and waiting time
- 04
Size and check each case against sources
- 05
Rank cases for your team to decide
What your team receives
Everything arrives in a form your team can check, edit, and take into budget and vendor decisions.
Today and proposed workflow maps
Each process drawn step by step across teams and systems, with manual steps and waiting time marked, beside the proposed version after automation.
Sized automation cases
A workbook of cases with volumes, hours, people, and cost as ranges, assumptions stated, and every figure checked and linked to the record behind it.
Ranked automation plan
A value creation plan built from the ranked cases, with each process split into work for software, work for AI, and work that needs a person's judgment.
Management and process owners decide which cases to fund, which tools or vendors to buy, and where a person keeps the final say. Cerenovus does not build or install the automation; your team leads the change.
See where software and AI should go first
Cerenovus reads approved company data through read-only access and ranks what it finds by value.