TL;DR
- 90-day modules: Discovery (2-3 weeks) + Build (6-8 weeks) + Validation (2-4 weeks)
- Typical investment: $60-120K per workflow automation module
- Complexity factors: integration points, exception cases, data quality
- Parallel operation adds 2-4 weeks but eliminates transition risk
Transparency about costs and timelines shouldn't be revolutionary, but in custom software it often is. Here's exactly what to expect when you engage with modular automation.
The 90-day module structure breaks down like this: Discovery Phase (2-3 weeks) covers process documentation, exception mapping, integration requirements, and success criteria definition. Build Phase (6-8 weeks) includes automation development, testing, integration work, and iteration based on feedback. Validation Phase (2-4 weeks) runs parallel operation, operator training, refinement, and cutover when ready.
Investment per module typically ranges from $60-120K depending on complexity. What drives complexity? Number of integration points (each system connection adds development and testing time). Exception case volume (more edge cases means more logic to encode). Data quality (clean, structured data automates faster than messy, inconsistent sources). Change management (some teams adopt faster than others).
For comparison, traditional custom software projects often start at $500K and stretch 12-18 months before delivering any value. The modular approach means you're getting working automation in 90 days for $60-120K—and you can stop at any point if results don't justify continued investment.
The parallel operation phase (2-4 weeks of validation) adds timeline but eliminates transition risk. Both systems run simultaneously. Operators compare results. Cutover happens when confidence is established, not when vendors declare readiness. This prevents the 'go-live crisis' that plagues traditional implementations.
One more reality check: not every workflow is equally suited for automation. During discovery, we'll identify which processes offer the best ROI for automation investment. Sometimes the answer is 'start with workflow B instead of workflow A.' That's a feature, not a bug—we'd rather deliver proven value than chase marginal automation opportunities.