IntelligenceShow us your workflowBuyer’s guide · choose the right approach
The useful question is which approach can complete your workflow reliably, with ownership and costs you understand. Compare existing features, configured workflows, hybrid solutions and custom systems before committing.
Six useful questions
Start with your existing software, then evaluate the smallest addition that can complete the work. The choice depends on a defined process, operating ownership, supported access and whether your requirements are standard or distinct. Use the questions below to identify a starting point, then test that conclusion against actual product capabilities.
Answer all six questions to see the reasoning. There is no score and no assumption that a custom build is the right answer.
These are Aule’s planning criteria, not a benchmark or a verified assessment of your systems. Procurement, security, budget and actual product capabilities may change the choice.
What you are really buying
Existing features, configured workflows, hybrid systems and custom builds distribute responsibility differently. Compare them using the same completed task and difficult cases. Examine account ownership, permissions, maintenance and export options alongside delivery cost. The best choice is the one your team can operate and change without losing control of the work.
| Approach | Good reason to consider it | What to prove | Who owns the gap? |
|---|---|---|---|
| Existing feature | Your current application can complete the required task. | Real user permissions, edge cases, licensing and reporting. | Your application owner handles setup, adoption and vendor escalation. |
| Configured workflow | The work follows established rules across accessible systems. | Record matching, retry behavior, failed-run alerts and approvals. | A named workflow owner maintains connections and resolves exceptions. |
| Hybrid | Existing software works, but a specific handoff or interface is missing. | The boundary between the existing system and the addition. | One owner must coordinate the whole workflow across providers. |
| Custom build | A distinct process or experience cannot be met by the options tested. | A complete slice of the workflow plus portability, security and support. | A product owner and delivery team maintain the application and its dependencies. |
Same problem, different choices
A sensible choice follows the requirement rather than the label on the technology. A simple approval may fit an existing feature, while a distinct client experience could justify a custom interface. These illustrative examples show how to narrow the decision; they are design scenarios, not claims about completed customer projects.
Staff submit requests, a manager reviews them and the result is recorded. Test the native approval feature first. If records must move between applications, evaluate a configured connection and a failed-run queue.
Critical test: the same submission arrives twice. It should not create two approvals or duplicate downstream work.
Existing practice software may provide the portal and checklist. If a distinct validation or reviewer experience is missing, evaluate a bounded addition while keeping the practice system as the source of truth.
Critical test: a client replaces an incorrect document. The reviewer must see which version was accepted and why.
Check whether approved software can answer from the permitted knowledge sources. If actions are required, define each one, its permissions and approval step before selecting an agent platform.
Critical test: the source does not contain the answer. The assistant must acknowledge the gap and route the question appropriately.
Different managers disagree about what counts as complete, and nobody owns exceptions. Clarify the checklist and responsibilities first. Keeping the manual process temporarily is a valid implementation decision.
Critical test: two reviewers assess the same submission. Resolve disagreements before encoding the rules.
Before you commit
Ask every provider to demonstrate the same complete workflow, including a failure and a recovery. Confirm who owns the accounts, data and operating instructions, how permissions are restricted and how you can leave. A polished demo is useful only when its assumptions and responsibilities match the system you will actually operate.
Compare the complete commitment
Compare the same scope over the same period, including setup, subscriptions, usage, support and staff review. Include migration and an eventual handoff or exit. Keep recovered staff capacity separate from actual spending reductions. A proposal with less upfront work may still require substantial internal effort or ongoing operation to deliver the result.
Ask each option to list its assumptions and excluded work. Include who prepares the data, configures access, reviews exceptions, maintains connections and trains the team.
Use the AI implementation cost worksheet to compare editable scenarios and download their calculations. Its example values are synthetic; use actual quotes and measured workflow effort for a buying decision.
Set a review point after a representative operating period. If the selected approach cannot meet its acceptance criteria, decide whether to revise the scope, change the approach or stop.
Before we begin
Custom software can address specific requirements, but capability depends on scope, access, delivery quality and ongoing maintenance. Test configurable alternatives before assuming a custom build is necessary.
Not every workflow does. Clear rules, record updates and approvals can often be expressed as a configured process. If language interpretation is useful, define its role and human review points rather than making every step depend on it.
That is the first option to examine. A hybrid can retain the existing system and add a specific connection or interface, provided the supported access and ownership boundaries are workable.
No. It applies the visible planning rules to your answers. It does not inspect accounts, contracts, permissions or product features. Confirm those facts with your team and vendors before committing.
Yes. The comparison selector lets you inspect a different option and export it alongside the original recommendation. Use the proof criteria to test why that alternative would be better.
Find the right starting point
Explore business process automation for repeatable handoffs, systems integration for connected records and AI implementation for supervised work inside existing software.
If Microsoft is the intended platform, see Copilot Studio consulting. Start with Find Your AI Opportunity to choose a workflow, or Plan Your AI System to document the approach.
A practical first conversation
Bring the workflow, the products you already use and the options you are considering. We can help identify the missing facts and define a small, inspectable test. The next step should make the buying decision clearer, with ownership and operating responsibilities your team can understand.
Talk through your options