Automation engineering · Miami, FL
Kwestra designs and runs production workflow systems for fintech, insurance and high-volume back office. The machine is that system, on synthetic invoices. The first one stops at a lever only a person can pull. Approve it and the rest post on their own.
*Typical for one well-scoped process. Some take longer.
$2,500, credited in full against the build. Two weeks. You keep the process map whether or not you hire us.
Human gate · PO reference
No purchase-order number on the page, and 0.61 is under the 0.85 line. A person decides before anything posts.
Result · INV-10482
Synthetic invoices, authored by us. The machine is a drawing of the process. It runs in your browser; nothing is uploaded and nothing is stored.
What posts
Four fields from INV-10482 clear on their own. The purchase order does not, because it is not on the page. Until someone approves, amends or rejects it, the system of record is untouched.
| Field | Value | Confidence | Disposition |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vendor | Northwind Supply Co. | 99 | Cleared |
| Invoice no. | INV-10482 | 98 | Cleared |
| Invoice date | 12 Mar 2026 | 97 | Cleared |
| Amount due | $4,280.00 | 94 | Cleared |
| PO reference | Not on the page | 61 | Held for a person |
Synthetic invoice constructed to illustrate the approval gate. Not a client record, not a real payable.
The real question
You have probably seen at least one of these. They are the reason the budget conversation is hard, and they are what the engagement is designed around.
The vendor pitch ran clean on ten documents. Production had four hundred edge cases nobody had written down, and the fixed price became a change order every fortnight.
What we do instead
We map the process with the people who actually run it before anyone quotes. The exceptions go in the scope document, by name, with a decision for each.
It automated the judgement as well as the typing. Now nobody can explain a denial to a regulator, and the team quietly stops trusting the output.
What we do instead
Every consequential action stops at a human gate. The person approving sees what the system saw and why it proposed what it did, and that trail is the audit record.
Eighteen months, three vendors, one very good dashboard, and the team still does the work by hand because the thing never reached production.
What we do instead
One process, in production, in thirty days. Not a pilot, not a proof of concept. A narrow thing that runs, with the second process scoped off what we learned.
Scope
Four shapes of work. If the process you have in mind is not one of these, the audit will tell you that in week one rather than in month four.
Invoices, claims, applications, KYC packets, remittance advice. Anything that arrives as a file or an email and ends up retyped into a system of record.
Triage, routing, drafting and first-pass decisions, where a person signs off anything consequential before it leaves the building.
The thirty-year-old core system, the portal with no export, the spreadsheet three teams depend on. Automation that holds up when the vendor changes a screen.
If you do not want to own the operation, we staff and run it on the system we built, and you hold us to a throughput number instead of a headcount.
Start here
Two weeks, a fixed fee, and a finish line. You end it holding a map of how your operation actually runs. That map is worth having even if you never hire us to build anything.
If we finish the map and conclude the process is not worth automating, we say so, you keep the map, and we do not send you a build quote to be polite.
Schedule
On day fourteen you are holding
We take on a small number of audits at a time so the engineer who maps your process is the one who builds it.
Book a systems auditOrder of magnitude
Bands, not quotes. The audit produces the actual number, in writing, against a scope that names its own exclusions. We would rather you disqualify us now than in week six.
A single intake or back-office line. Extraction, validation, a human gate, write-back.
Several systems, real exception handling, a legacy platform with no usable API in the chain.
Build, then staffed operation against an agreed throughput and accuracy number.
What moves the number
Objections
If yours is not here, it is a better use of the call than a form.
A platform sells you the capability and leaves the hard part with you. The hard part is not the tooling, it is knowing what your process really does, including the exceptions nobody documented. We do that part first and then build on whatever tooling fits, including tools you already pay for.
Usually it did not stick for one of three reasons: the scope was discovered during the build instead of before it, the system automated judgement and lost the team’s trust, or it never actually reached production. The audit exists to kill the first one, the human gate handles the second, and committing to one narrow process in thirty days handles the third.
No. If your processes were already documented accurately you would not need the audit. Undocumented, inconsistent and partly tribal is the normal starting condition and it is what the two weeks are for.
That is your call and we will not pretend otherwise. What we will tell you honestly is which parts of the work the system can take and which parts still need a person, because the exception queue almost always needs one. Most clients redeploy rather than reduce, because the backlog was the problem, not the headcount.
You do. Code, infrastructure, documentation and runbook. We will run it for you if you would rather not, but that is a service you choose, not a dependency we engineer in.
We tell you, in writing, and you keep the map and the register anyway. It happens, and it is a better outcome than a build that was never going to pay for itself. We would rather lose the build than be the vendor in your next cautionary story.
We run a small number of audits at a time so that the engineer who maps your process is the one who builds it. Book a call and we will tell you the next honest start date rather than the one you want to hear.
Next step
Option A · Fastest
Thirty minutes with the engineer who would run the audit. Bring the process that annoys you most. You will leave knowing whether it is worth automating, whether or not you book anything.
The slot is with an engineer, not a sales rep.
Option B
A person reads this, not a routing rule. You will hear back within one business day. If it is urgent, reach us at [email protected].
