Where is the value, what is it worth, and what do we do first? A defensible number, arrived at by a method someone can interrogate.
There is no shortage of AI ideas in your organisation and no agreed way to choose between them. A pilot works and nobody can say what it would be worth at scale. A vendor proposal carries a benefit figure you cannot test. A budget line exists and the business case that should sit behind it does not.
What you need is a defensible number, arrived at by a method someone can interrogate, that says this opportunity is worth this much, on this evidence, with this much confidence, and here is what it would cost to get it.
The AI Opportunity Diagnostic produces that for three priority opportunities, tells you whether your data will support them, sequences them into a roadmap, and names the ideas not worth pursuing. Five to six weeks, fixed fee, neutral on AI vendors.
This is the product a finance director will approve, because it ends in numbers rather than a maturity score.
Built from your processes, your existing ideas and your operational data.
Three hours. Your people score the longlist against four published criteria with weightings you set, scoring independently first. Four to six survive.
Three go through thirteen criteria across availability, quality, provenance and privacy, scored with the people who own the data rather than the people who want the outcome. Four are hard gates, so an opportunity cannot average its way past data that does not exist.
The volume of invoices, claims or cases, from a system extract wherever one exists. How long a unit takes today. Your own fully loaded cost per hour. A realisation factor, because time saved is not cash until somebody decides what happens to it. And the internal cost to deliver, deducted.
Your sponsor, finance lead and an operations lead agree every input before the model is built.
Sequenced by dependency rather than benefit. Ninety minutes each: your sponsor privately first, then your leadership team or board.
Nothing is a single figure. Every benefit is a range, and its width is set by the evidence behind it rather than by how confident we feel.
| Evidence behind the input | Range applied | Treatment |
|---|---|---|
| A system extract | ± 15% | Included in the headline total |
| Two independent people describing the same thing | ± 30% | Included in the headline total |
| One uncorroborated estimate | ± 50% | Kept out of the headline total and listed separately as indicative |
So the total your board sees is made only of figures your own people or systems stood behind. We hold no peer benchmark.
The business case does not include what the software will cost, because that would mean deciding which products it might be, and we do not make product decisions. You receive a capability requirement instead, which you can put to the market for a real cost rather than a modelled one. The report says plainly that the cost side is incomplete.
All three Excel instruments are licensed for internal use, so you can re-run them without us.
Effort scales with the number of opportunities quantified rather than with the size of the organisation, so one price and one scope. All figures in Australian dollars, excluding GST.
| Element | Detail |
|---|---|
| Price | $42,000 excluding GST, fixed fee |
| Duration | Five to six weeks. Six is the planning assumption; five is offered rather than promised |
| Included | Twenty candidates screened and scored, four to six shortlisted at a facilitated prioritisation workshop, three taken through the data readiness gate and quantified in full, a value validation session, a phased roadmap, an indicative business case, three populated Excel instruments, a two-page executive summary and two presentations |
| Not included | Licence, platform or vendor cost, deliberately. Technical architecture. A full readiness assessment. Delivery of anything recommended |
| Additional opportunity | $6,500 each, quantified in full through the data gate |
| Additional presentation | $2,500 each |
| Travel | No charge within the Perth metropolitan area |
Your organisation contributes roughly 60 to 85 hours across the six weeks, no individual giving more than about six. That is more than a readiness assessment asks, and it is why the numbers are yours rather than ours. A named finance lead who can release cost and volume data is a condition of starting.
Take it when you have several candidates and no defensible way to choose between them, or one candidate with no evidenced value behind it, and a decision with a date on it.
We will walk your candidate opportunities with you and give an honest read, including telling you when a diagnostic is not warranted. There is no free or self-serve version.