Solutions · Enterprise
Business Process Automation
Fragmented manual steps replaced by one workflow you can see, manage and measure.
Why processes are hard
The process, as people describe it
Nobody complains about workflow orchestration. They complain that it depends who is in that day, that nobody owns the middle, and that answering a simple status question takes four systems and a phone call.
What you hear
It depends who is in that day
The same request handled three different ways by three people, each of whom is doing it correctly by their own understanding of a process nobody wrote down.
What you hear
Nobody owns the middle
The start of the process belongs to one team and the end to another. The handover in between is an email, and when the email is missed, the process stops without anyone noticing.
What you hear
We cannot say where it is
A customer or a colleague asks for a status. Answering means opening four systems and a shared inbox, then asking someone who is on leave.
What is underneath
A person is the integration
The ERP, the CRM, the portal and the mailbox do not talk, so someone copies between them. That person is the most fragile component in the process and the hardest to replace.
What is underneath
Exceptions and routine get the same handling
Most cases are ordinary and could be settled by a rule. They queue behind the few that are difficult, and get the same manual attention.
What is underneath
There is no record of the decision
A case was approved, declined or escalated. Why, by whom and on what evidence lives in an email thread, if it lives anywhere. Six months later, nobody can reconstruct it.
How PTAS AI automates it
Write the process down, then let agents run it
The fragmented steps become one workflow with a named agent on each step, your rules made explicit, and a person placed exactly where a decision needs one. What you get is a process you can see, manage and measure.
-
01
Understand
The process is mapped as it genuinely runs, including the shortcuts and the spreadsheet in the middle. Each step is named with what triggers it, what it reads, what it decides, where the result goes and who is allowed to override it. Most of the value of the project is in this map; it is usually the first time the process has been written down in full.
The map is the specification
-
02
Decide
Each step is assigned to an agent that does one narrow thing: read the document, look up the record, apply the rule, route the case, post the result. Your rules become explicit configuration with thresholds and tolerances, and the cases that need a person are defined as a category rather than discovered as they arrive.
One agent per step, one rule per decision
-
03
Act
The process runs on the Agentic AI Platform, triggered by whatever starts it: a document in a mailbox, a record created in the CRM, a date, an API call. Routine cases run end to end. Cases that meet your exception criteria stop at a named person with the evidence and the question in front of them, and continue once they decide.
Routine runs; exceptions stop at a person
-
04
Verify
Every step writes what it saw, which rule it applied, what it did and what it checked afterwards, into one record per case. Status is a query, not a phone call. Volume, cycle time and exception rate are measured per step, so the bottleneck is a number and a change to a rule can be judged against it.
The process can explain itself
The workflow
The same document, counted in hands
The clearest way to see what a process costs is to count the people who touch one ordinary case. A supplier invoice is the familiar example, but the count looks the same for an onboarding pack, a claim or a renewal.
One supplier invoice, counted in hands
The typing is the obvious cost. The hunting is usually the larger one.
Counted in hands
Six people touched the document. With agents, one person touches it, and only if something failed.
The hunting is the larger cost
The record is attached to the entry it created, so finding it later takes no time.
Rules, written down
A process that depends on who is in that day becomes one that runs the same way every time.
Key capabilities
Eight things the workflow has to do well
A workflow tool that only routes forms moves the queue, not the work. Reading what arrives, applying the rules and keeping the record are what take the work away from people.
Trigger
Any starting point
A document arriving in a mailbox or portal, a record created or changed in a business system, a scheduled date, a form submission or an API call. The process starts when the event happens, not when someone notices it.
Trigger
Documents turned into data
Whatever arrives on paper or as a PDF is read by DocPro into fields with confidence scores, so the first step of the process works from data rather than from a file someone has to open.
Decide
Rules as configuration
Thresholds, tolerances, allowed values and approval bands held as configuration you can read and change, with effective dates. A rule change is a setting, not a change request.
Decide
Lookups across systems
A case enriched from the ERP, the CRM, a master or an external registry before a decision is made, so the rule runs on the full picture rather than on what was in the email.
Route
Exception criteria
The cases that must stop at a person are defined up front: by value, by risk, by missing data, by a rule that could not be applied. Everything else proceeds.
Route
Human-in-the-loop steps
A named person sees the case, the evidence and the question, decides, and the process continues. Delegation, escalation and a recorded reason are part of the step.
Record
One record per case
What each agent saw, applied, did and checked, in order, with the documents attached. Status and history are a query against this record.
Measure
Per-step measurement
Volume, cycle time, exception rate and rework counted per step, so the slow step and the noisy rule are visible, and a change can be judged against the number it was meant to move.
Agents and exceptions
How the work is divided
Each agent owns one narrow step and hands the case on with everything it established. Narrow jobs are deliberate: an agent that does one thing can be tested, measured and replaced, and one that does everything cannot.
One invoice, five agents, no handover meeting · Illustrative example
Narrow jobs are deliberate. An agent that does one thing can be tested, measured and replaced; one that does everything cannot.
A person enters this chain only where you have placed a gate: a value above a band, a rule that could not be applied, a lookup that found nothing, a risk flag. They see the case, the evidence and the one question, decide, and the chain continues. Their decision is recorded with its reason on the same record as everything the agents did, so the case reads as one story rather than as a log and an email thread.
Business outcomes
What changes, and how you would measure it
We do not quote efficiency gains before mapping your process. We do agree the measures up front, on your cases, so the decision to extend is based on something.
What changes
Hands per case
Count the people who touch an ordinary case from trigger to completion. The target for a routine case is none; the measure tells you how far from that you are, by step.
What changes
Cycle time, by step
Time from trigger to completion, broken down by step, so a process that takes nine days reveals that eight of them are spent waiting for one approval.
What changes
Exception rate, by reason
The share of cases that stop at a person, and why. A reason that fires constantly is usually a rule that needs changing, or a data problem upstream.
What changes
Status answered without asking
How often a status request is answered from the record rather than by finding a person. The aim is all of them.
What changes
Consistency across handlers
The same case type producing the same outcome whoever is on shift. Measure it by sampling decisions before and after; the variance should disappear.
What changes
Decisions you can reconstruct
Any case, picked at random, explained from the record: what was seen, which rule ran, who decided and on what evidence. This is the measure an auditor applies.
Integrations
The systems stay; the person between them goes
Agents read from and write to the systems the process already uses, through their APIs, files or events. Nothing is migrated, and the ERP, the CRM and the rest remain the systems of record for what they hold.
REST API
Any system · read and write
Webhooks
Events in and out
SAP
ERP · API, IDoc or file
Oracle
ERP · API or file
Microsoft Dynamics
ERP and CRM · API
NetSuite
ERP · API
Tally
Accounting · XML import
Zoho
CRM and accounting · API
QuickBooks
Accounting · API
Four integration methods are possible: native integration, API integration, file or flat-file exchange, and custom integration. The systems named here are planning examples; which method applies to each system in your process is confirmed during assessment rather than assumed. See integrations for the full list.
Security and governance
Controls an auditor would recognise
Automating a process concentrates it, which is a risk if the boundaries are vague. These are the controls built into every process on the platform, and the security page has the detail.
Bounded agents
Each agent has a narrow job, a defined set of systems it may read and write, and limits on the values it may decide alone. What it may not do is configuration, agreed before it runs.
Human gates that cannot be skipped
Steps that require a person are enforced by the workflow. An agent cannot approve past a threshold, and a person cannot approve without the reason being recorded.
A complete case record
Every case carries what each step saw, which rule it applied, what it did and what it verified, with the documents attached. Exportable for audit and queryable for any status question.
Data handling and access
Role-based access to cases and to configuration, data held under your retention policy, and cloud, private cloud or on-premise deployment where supported, with ISO/IEC 27001-aligned practices.
Product connection
The products that deliver it
Every process runs on the Agentic AI Platform. DocPro and FinSuite supply the document and finance agents where the process needs them; the rest are assembled from the agent library and configured to your rules.
FAQ
Questions operations leaders ask
How is this different from RPA?
RPA replays clicks. It works while the screen stays the same and breaks silently when it does not, and it has no idea what it is looking at. The agents here read the document, apply a rule to data and write a result through an interface built for that. They also record why they did what they did, which a bot cannot. Where you already have RPA for a stable, screen-only task, it can be a step in the process; it is rarely the right thing to build the process from.
How is this different from enterprise workflow automation?
They overlap, and the enterprise workflow automation page goes deeper on processes that span several departments and systems. This page is about the general case: any repeatable business process, in one team or several, that today depends on people copying between systems and remembering the rules. If your process crosses four systems and has no natural owner, read that page next; it is linked below.
Which processes are good candidates?
High volume, low variety, rules that exist even if nobody has written them down, and a person currently acting as the glue between systems. Order intake, onboarding, claims, renewals, approvals and most document-triggered work fit. Decisions that genuinely need context not found in any document do not, and we would rather say so than automate something that escalates everything.
Our rules are not written down. Is that a problem?
It is the normal starting point, and writing them down is a real part of the project. It is also usually the most valuable part, because it surfaces the cases where two people have quietly been applying different tolerances. The map and the rules are yours at the end, whatever else happens.
How long does it take to go live?
The typical range is four to twelve weeks for one process, and it varies with how many systems are involved, how much of the process is document-driven and how long the rules take to agree. We would start with one process and measure it, because a process proved on your own cases is a better argument for the second one than any plan.
Keep reading
Related solutions and products
Enterprise Workflow Automation
Processes that span departments and systems, in more depth.
Read more →Custom Enterprise Automation
When the process fits no template and needs its own agents.
Read more →Agentic AI Platform
The runtime every process on this page runs on.
Read more →Intelligent Process Automation
How AI, rules and workflow combine, step by step.
Read more →Next step
Bring the process that depends on who is in
Describe it the way your team would, shortcuts included. Mapping it is the first step whether or not you automate it, and the map is yours either way.