Start with one workflow.

Choose work your team already needs to finish.

Start with a recurring investigation, a reporting cycle, an asset handover or an evidence package. Identify the person who owns the result and the people who do the work today.

Describe a recent example: what triggered it, which systems were opened, what had to be reconstructed and what a usable result looked like. That gives the evaluation a concrete starting point.

• O&M: an investigation brief and proposed next task.
• Asset management: a variance explanation with its supporting records.
• Asset handover: a reconciled operating record and unresolved exceptions.
• Commissioning: a requirement-to-evidence map and missing-evidence list.

Bring representative records, after agreeing access.

The first conversation needs a description of the workflow and systems, not confidential operational files. Once the scope and access route are agreed, select historical examples that include both routine cases and exceptions.

• The source records and identifiers normally used by the team.
• An example of an accepted output and one that needed correction.
• The applicable procedure, reviewer and destination system.
• Known gaps, access constraints and data-handling requirements.

Agree what useful means before building.

Compare the output with the current process. Include the time spent preparing inputs, checking results, correcting errors and maintaining the workflow. A faster draft is useful only if the accepted result is better for the team.

• Quality: correct equipment, period, definitions and source references.
• Completeness: missing records and uncertain conclusions remain visible.
• Effort: time to a reviewer-accepted output, including correction.
• Risk: false matches, missed issues and unnecessary escalation.

Make the responsibilities explicit.

Your workflow owner supplies process knowledge and acceptance criteria. Your technical team agrees the access and data boundaries. Invertix engineers map the records, configure the workflow and work through its exceptions with the people who use it.

Name the reviewer, the owner of each connection and the person responsible for changes after deployment. Permissions to create work or update another system are a separate part of the agreed scope.

Decide what happens after the evaluation.

Review the result against the agreed baseline. Decide whether to continue, change the scope or stop. If continuing, agree the commercial terms, operating responsibilities and next workflow.

Timing and price depend on source access, data quality, workflow complexity and the engineering required. They are agreed during scoping.