How every build is designed
Two layers, one approval gate.
The same structure in every industry. Both layers read only from sources your firm approves, and neither releases anything on its own.
- Approved sourcesYour files, records, and procedures. Nothing else.
- Core systemThe assistant your people work with. Start with one.
- Workflow automationsAdd-ons. One defined task each, attached to a core system.
- Approval gateA named person at your firm reviews and approves.
- ReleasedTo a client, an agency, or the next step, only after approval.
Executive / Partner Copilot
For owners and partners
Pulls status, deadlines, and risk from your own records into short briefs that support a decision. It lays out the options and the tradeoffs. You make the call.
Operations & SOP Copilot
For the people doing the work
Answers how-do-we-do-this questions from your firm's own procedures, with the source cited, and runs the checklists that keep the work consistent from one person to the next.
Compliance & Documentation Copilot
For what leaves the building
Drafts inside locked templates, cites every reference, checks completeness, and holds each document at an approval gate until the right person signs off.
Why automations are add-ons. Each workflow automation attaches to a core system. That way it inherits the same approved sources, the same limits, the same approval gate, and the same record, instead of running outside them.
Choose your industry
Six examples, one method.
Each industry follows the same path: where the time goes, the process fixed first, then the build options and a concept demo.
Environmental consulting firms
-
DeconstructWhere the time goes
Most project hours go into what happens after the fieldwork.
- Field data arrives in inconsistent formats and must be checked before anyone can use it
- Regulatory reports and permit packages rebuilt from the last similar project
- QA/QC depends on whoever has time to review
- Procedures live with a few senior staff
-
RedesignThe process is fixed first
These options come after the work is mapped and the process is redesigned. Start with one core system, then add workflow automations where the documented savings justify them. If your team can describe a process, it can be scoped during design.
-
AugmentBuild options
Core systems Start with one
Executive / Partner Copilot
For owners and partners
Decision briefs with options, tradeoffs, and risk flags, plus project summaries for principal review.
Operations & SOP Copilot
For the people doing the work
SOP answers with the source cited, QA/QC checklists before a deliverable is released, and onboarding for new and seasonal field staff.
Compliance & Documentation Copilot
For what leaves the building
Drafting inside locked templates, a citation on every regulatory reference, and an approval gate before anything is transmitted.
Workflow automations Add-ons to any core system
Regulatory report drafting
Drafts submissions inside your approved templates, populated with site data. A scientist or PE reviews each draft before release.
Field data processing
Checks field data against project parameters, flags anomalies, and formats it for the report. Exceptions go to the project manager.
Permit application assembly
Pulls permit components from project files and checks completeness against agency requirements before licensed sign-off.
Who signs off
The project manager, scientist, or licensed professional who owns the deliverable. Nothing goes to an agency or a client without that approval.
What it will not do
It will not make regulatory determinations, interpret site conditions, or submit anything to an agency. Professional judgment on the data stays with your staff.
Concept demo video
Environmental Document Intelligence (EDIDS)
Business challenge
Senior staff spend hours turning field data, site records, and regulatory research into report drafts, then checking each statement against its source.
What it is designed to improve
Less senior time on first drafts and source checks, and earlier notice when a regulatory change may affect an open project.
What to watch for
- Source files are split into searchable passages, so each statement can be traced.
- Selecting a statement in the draft opens the exact source passage and its quote check.
- The quality control center flags missing information, unsupported statements, inconsistent data, failed number checks, and prohibited statements.
- The policy tracker links each federal or state change to the library entries and projects it may affect. A qualified professional decides whether a change applies and approves the report.
What the demo shows
This demo drafts environmental reports for three sample projects: a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, a wetland delineation, and a NEPA Environmental Assessment. Every factual statement in a draft links to the source passage it came from. Rule-based quality checks run on every draft, and a qualified professional approves the report before it is issued. A daily policy tracker checks federal and state sources and links each change to the regulatory library and the projects it may affect.
Build options shown: Compliance & Documentation Copilot with regulatory report drafting and policy change tracking
Engineering firms
-
DeconstructWhere the time goes
Much of the delay sits in proposals, RFIs, submittals, and QA/QC.
- Proposals written from scratch under deadline
- RFIs and submittals arrive by email and phone with no single log, so response dates slip
- QA/QC checklists exist, but nothing stops a deliverable from going out before every item is cleared
-
RedesignThe process is fixed first
These options come after the work is mapped and the process is redesigned. Start with one core system, then add workflow automations where the documented savings justify them. If your team can describe a process, it can be scoped during design.
-
AugmentBuild options
Core systems Start with one
Executive / Partner Copilot
For owners and partners
Bid or no-bid briefs, pipeline and financial snapshots, and flags on overdue deliverables and likely scope creep.
Operations & SOP Copilot
For the people doing the work
Firm standards and specifications looked up with the source cited, QA/QC checklists enforced, and likely errors flagged for the reviewer.
Compliance & Documentation Copilot
For what leaves the building
Proposal and specification drafting bound to your templates, with a completeness check before work reaches the licensed PE.
Workflow automations Add-ons to any core system
Proposal drafting
A structured first draft from scope inputs, inside your approved templates. A principal reviews every proposal.
RFI and submittal processing
Logs, classifies, and routes RFIs and submittals, tracks response deadlines, and flags overdue items. It does not write the technical response.
QA/QC checklist enforcement
Checks outgoing deliverables against your checklist and holds release until the licensed PE confirms each item is cleared.
Who signs off
The licensed PE responsible for the work, on every technical deliverable. A principal approves each proposal before it reaches a client.
What it will not do
It will not perform or check engineering calculations, stamp or seal anything, or release a deliverable on its own.
Concept demo video
Executive AI Assistant
Business challenge
The answers exist in procedures, design guides, project logs, and regulations, but finding them takes time, and an answer without a source cannot be relied on.
What it is designed to improve
Faster answers from the firm's own documents, each with a source a reviewer can check, and engineering decisions routed to the engineer by name.
What to watch for
- Each answer quotes the governing passage and cites the document it came from.
- A step-by-step record shows how the answer was checked: scope, boundary rules, search terms, and the passages selected.
- A question about open RFIs across every project returns a count and an exportable table.
- A structural question is routed to the Engineer of Record, and a request outside the approved scope is declined and sent to the right person.
What the demo shows
This demo shows an assistant for the operations principal at a fictional engineering firm. It searches a connected library of 2,531 sample documents: procedures, design guides, research briefs, project records, and public OSHA regulations. Each answer quotes and cites its source. Decisions that belong to a licensed engineer are routed to the Engineer of Record by name.
Build options shown: Executive / Partner Copilot, connected to the firm's document library
CPA and accounting firms
-
DeconstructWhere the time goes
In tax season the bottleneck is rarely the return itself.
- Chasing clients for missing documents
- Sorting what arrives
- Keying data into workpapers
- Bringing seasonal staff up to speed on how your firm does things
-
RedesignThe process is fixed first
These options come after the work is mapped and the process is redesigned. Start with one core system, then add workflow automations where the documented savings justify them. If your team can describe a process, it can be scoped during design.
-
AugmentBuild options
Core systems Start with one
Executive / Partner Copilot
For owners and partners
Client portfolio status, engagement profitability flags, and deadline and capacity risk summaries for partners.
Operations & SOP Copilot
For the people doing the work
Procedure answers that cite firm policy, tax season onboarding for seasonal staff, and workpaper checklists.
Compliance & Documentation Copilot
For what leaves the building
Engagement letter and workpaper drafting in locked templates, with a partner sign-off gate on every client deliverable.
Workflow automations Add-ons to any core system
Tax document extraction and classification
Classifies client documents, extracts the data fields, flags missing items, and routes the file. Staff review every classification.
Client document chase
Tracks outstanding requests and drafts follow-ups in firm-approved templates. Staff approve each message before it is sent.
Workpaper assembly
Moves extracted data into your standard workpapers and flags discrepancies before anything reaches a partner.
Who signs off
A CPA partner, on every client deliverable. Staff approve document classifications and client messages at their own stage.
What it will not do
It will not give tax advice, take a tax position, prepare or file a return on its own, or send anything to a client without approval.
Concept demo video
CPA Document Sorting and Extraction
Business challenge
In tax season, staff sort client documents by hand, re-key values from W-2s and 1099s, and find missing items late.
What it is designed to improve
Reviewers verify values instead of retyping them, and missing or conflicting documents surface before preparation starts.
What to watch for
- Each extracted value sits beside the source document and links to its location on the page.
- Exceptions and approvals are listed in one review queue, with priority and a recommended action.
- A request for outstanding documents is drafted, and it is sent only after staff approval.
- Conflicting values and duplicate forms are flagged before preparation starts.
What the demo shows
This demo processes a sample tax document package for a client of a fictional CPA firm. Each document is classified, its data fields are extracted, and the package is checked for completeness against the client checklist. Staff review the results before approved work is routed to the right team.
Build options shown: Tax document extraction and classification, with client document chase
Law firms
-
DeconstructWhere the time goes
Associate and paralegal hours go to work that is routine in structure, costly to get wrong, and often hard to bill in full.
- New matter intake
- Conflict checks
- First-pass contract review
- Organizing discovery productions
-
RedesignThe process is fixed first
These options come after the work is mapped and the process is redesigned. Start with one core system, then add workflow automations where the documented savings justify them. If your team can describe a process, it can be scoped during design.
-
AugmentBuild options
Core systems Start with one
Executive / Partner Copilot
For owners and partners
Matter status, risk exposure, and deadline and conflict flags, summarized for attorney and partner decisions.
Operations & SOP Copilot
For the people doing the work
Answers on firm procedure that cite policy and precedent documents, plus matter workflow guidance for new associates.
Compliance & Documentation Copilot
For what leaves the building
Drafting inside approved templates and style standards, a citation on every legal reference, and an attorney review gate.
Workflow automations Add-ons to any core system
Matter intake and conflict screening
Collects matter details, checks your client records for potential conflicts, and routes the matter to the responsible attorney, who clears it.
Contract review and clause extraction
Extracts defined clauses, compares them with your firm's standard positions, and flags deviations for attorney review.
Discovery document organization
Classifies productions by type and by relevance tags your team defines, then produces an indexed set for attorney review.
Who signs off
The responsible attorney, before any client communication, filing, or external release.
What it will not do
It will not give legal advice, reach legal conclusions, make final privilege or relevance determinations, or communicate with clients on its own.
Concept demo video
Legal Document Intelligence
Business challenge
Associates read each agreement line by line, copy terms into checklists, and compare clauses with firm positions from memory.
What it is designed to improve
A consistent first pass against the firm's own clause library, so attorney time goes to the judgment calls, with each decision recorded.
What to watch for
- Every extracted provision links to its source passage in the contract.
- Each clause is compared with the firm's standard positions. The system draws no legal conclusions.
- A flagged item, such as a missing limitation of liability, waits for the attorney to accept it, request a revision, or escalate it to a partner.
- The review report is generated only after the attorney approves the review.
What the demo shows
This demo runs a first-pass review of a sample professional services agreement for a fictional law firm. It extracts the main provisions with links to the source text, compares each clause with the firm's clause library, and flags deviations and missing provisions. The attorney decides each flagged item, and the approved review becomes a client-ready report.
Build options shown: Contract review and clause extraction
Real estate firms
-
DeconstructWhere the time goes
Every transaction carries the same documents, the same deadlines, and the same client updates.
- Documents and client updates rebuilt by hand for each deal
- Dates tracked across every active deal
- New agents learn the process by asking whoever is in the office
-
RedesignThe process is fixed first
These options come after the work is mapped and the process is redesigned. Start with one core system, then add workflow automations where the documented savings justify them. If your team can describe a process, it can be scoped during design.
-
AugmentBuild options
Core systems Start with one
Executive / Partner Copilot
For owners and partners
Transaction pipeline status, deal risk flags, and deadline exposure across active deals, for broker review.
Operations & SOP Copilot
For the people doing the work
Answers on transaction procedure that cite firm policy, onboarding for new agents, and closing checklists.
Compliance & Documentation Copilot
For what leaves the building
Drafting inside approved templates and disclosure standards, with broker sign-off before anything reaches a client.
Workflow automations Add-ons to any core system
Inquiry intake and lead routing
Captures each inquiry, records it in your CRM, and recommends an agent by rules your brokerage sets. Fair housing topics go to a person.
Transaction document assembly
Fills firm templates with client and property data and checks completeness for broker sign-off.
Listing preparation
Brings property data and comparable sales from approved sources into a draft listing presentation for agent approval.
Client update drafting
Drafts status and milestone messages from current transaction data. The agent approves each one before it goes out.
Who signs off
The broker, on every client deliverable. Agents approve listing content and every follow-up or client update before it goes out.
What it will not do
It will not give transaction or pricing advice, set a list price, decide fair housing questions, or communicate with a client or another party on its own.
Concept demo video
RealtyOps
Business challenge
Inquiries are retyped into the CRM, leads are assigned inconsistently, and response times slip.
What it is designed to improve
Quicker, more consistent first responses with less retyping, while the agent approves every message.
What to watch for
- The intake conversation fills a structured record and asks only for missing details.
- Each agent is scored on specialty, area, price band, and workload. The routing reason is shown, and a person can override it.
- Every drafted message waits in a review queue. Nothing is sent without agent approval.
- Competing agreements and fair housing topics stop the automation and go to a person.
What the demo shows
This demo follows a new buyer inquiry at a fictional brokerage. The intake assistant records what the agent needs and asks only for what is missing. The inquiry is classified, routed to a best-fit agent with the reason shown, and recorded in the CRM, and a follow-up is drafted for the agent to approve.
Build options shown: Inquiry intake and lead routing, with client update drafting
Not on this list? The bottlenecks usually are.
The five industries above are our main focus. They are not the only firms we can help. Any firm that runs on documents, expert judgment, and a person who signs off has the same problems, and we can build the same kind of system for it. The example demo in this section comes from construction.
-
DeconstructThe same problems, in any firm
The same documents, rebuilt by hand
Reports, proposals, letters, and packets that start from a copy of the last one, then get reworked line by line.
Knowledge that lives in a few heads
The answers only one or two people know. When they are out, the work waits. When they leave, the knowledge leaves with them.
Incoming paperwork sorted by hand
Emails, forms, and files that someone has to open, read, name, and route before any real work can start.
Review that depends on who has time
The checklist exists, but nothing stops a document from going out before every item is done.
Deadlines tracked in someone's inbox
Due dates, follow-ups, and status that nobody can see in one place until something is late.
-
Examples, not a limitFirms this often includes
- General and specialty contractors
- Architecture and design firms
- Land surveying firms
- Property management companies
- Consulting and advisory firms
- Staffing and HR firms
- Marketing and communications agencies
Concept demo video: construction
Contractor AP and Lien Waiver Intelligence
Business challenge
Each lien waiver is checked by hand against the invoice, often across several accounting platforms, and mismatches are found late or after payment.
What it is designed to improve
Payments are proposed only after the waiver matches the invoice and the accounting record.
What to watch for
- Open payables from each connected accounting platform appear in one view.
- Each lien waiver is read and compared with the invoice and the vendor record.
- A waiver amount mismatch blocks the payment. The exception lists the values compared, the documents referenced, and the next steps.
- Every hold is a recommendation. A reviewer requests a corrected waiver, approves with a reason, or escalates, and nothing changes in the accounting system without that person.
What the demo shows
This demo shows accounts payable at a fictional general contractor. It brings open payables from several accounting platforms into one view, checks each lien waiver against the invoice and the accounting record, and holds any payment that is not ready. A person reviews every hold and decides what happens next.
Build options shown: Documentation and paperwork automation, with a review gate before payment
What stays the same
The same two layers, core systems and workflow automations, built on your own documents and your own process. The same AI governance, the same named person at your firm who approves what goes out, and the same record of everything the system does.
How we decide if it fits
The same way as for every other firm. We look at the work first. If the savings do not justify a build, we tell you. The Time Recovery Estimate accepts any industry, and Start here is the fastest way to ask.
Before you ask
Questions this page usually raises
Do we need all three core systems?
No. Most firms start with one core system and one automation, tied to the work that costs them the most. The design phase settles which one and why, before anything is built.
Can an automation run without a core system?
Each automation is built as an add-on to a core system. That is deliberate. It keeps every automation under the same approved sources, limits, approval gate, and record as the rest of the build.
Will it work with the software we already use?
We connect to the systems you already use where those systems allow it. Which connections are possible is confirmed during design and written into the design document you approve, before you commit to a build.
Are the demo videos real client systems?
No. Each video is a concept demonstration that SageLogic built with a fictional firm and sample data. It shows how a build can work and where a person approves the output. A client system is designed around that firm's own documents, software, and approval rules, so it will look different.