PROCESS REVIEW & PRACTICAL AI

AI-Assisted Enquiry-to-Proposal Workflow

Design a clearer route from scattered enquiries to complete requirements and response drafts for human approval.

Book a Free 30-Minute Call See a Workflow Example

Free, 30 minutes: discuss the bottleneck, what needs closer review and whether a scoped review would help.

Is this the right workflow to review?

For service businesses, industrial suppliers and project-based organisations that repeatedly qualify enquiries and prepare tailored responses or proposals.

What SIGMA prepares

Current-state and proposed enquiry workflow with responsibilities
Intake checklist, draft template and approval/exception rules
An evaluation plan and recommended next step

From an incomplete enquiry to a draft scope.

Illustrative workflow example using fictional data. Prepared example—not a live AI demo or a client result.

01 Initial enquiry

Fictional sender: Cedar Example Supply — an invented business.

Subject: Stock hand-off process review

We use email and a spreadsheet to pass stock requests from sales to operations. Details are sometimes missing. Can you review the hand-off and suggest a better process? Please let us know how to start.

Missing: required fields, responsibilities, volume and example records.

02 Clarification draft

UNSENT CLARIFICATION DRAFT: Which fields are needed for a complete stock request? Who submits and checks it? What is the approximate volume, and can you share redacted examples? Please do not include customer or confidential records in this initial exchange.

A person checks these questions before sending.

03 Information completed

FICTIONAL REPLY: We receive about 24 stock requests per week. A complete request needs an item code, quantity, required delivery date, site and request contact. The Sales Coordinator sends the email; the Operations Coordinator checks it and records it in the spreadsheet. Quantity and required delivery date are the fields most often missing. We can provide 6 redacted example records for a review. We want to improve this hand-off, not replace our inventory system.

04 Human-validated requirements

Validation is part of this fictional scenario, not a record of an actual review.

Process boundary: Sales email request → Operations completeness check → spreadsheet record or clarification
Required information: Item code, quantity, required delivery date, site and request contact
Reported volume: About 24 requests per week; fictional estimate, not a measured baseline
Roles: Sales Coordinator submits; Operations Coordinator checks completeness
Review evidence: 6 redacted example records to be supplied
Validation in this scenario: The two role owners confirm this requirements summary for review. The cause of missing fields is still not established.

05 Draft scope of work

Illustrative workflow example using fictional data. Prepared example—not a live AI demo or a client result.

Objective: Review the stock-request hand-off and design a clearer completeness check and clarification route.
Boundary: One sales-to-operations request flow using the existing email and spreadsheet.
In-scope tasks: Map the current hand-off; review the 6 example records; define the required-field checklist; draft intake and clarification templates; specify review and exception responsibilities; recommend evaluation measures.
Deliverables: Current/proposed process map, 5-field checklist, draft request and response templates, role/exception notes and an evaluation plan.
Inputs: 6 redacted request records, the current spreadsheet field names and discussion with the Sales Coordinator and Operations Coordinator.
Roles: SIGMA prepares the review/design outputs. The two client role owners validate requirements and review drafts. An authorised client representative approves any commercial scope.
Assumptions: The fictional reply is a starting point; examples and current practice still need checking. The 24-per-week estimate is not a verified baseline.
Exclusions: Inventory accuracy verification, purchasing decisions, system replacement, data migration, live AI-agent operation and email/CRM connections. Implementation or a system connection is not included unless separately agreed after capability and feasibility checks.
Acceptance & review: The role owners check the process map against the 6 records and confirm all 5 required fields, exception routes and review responsibilities. Record corrections and approval before issuing a final scope.
Fees: [FEES — TO BE AGREED]
Timing: [TIMING — TO BE AGREED]

DRAFT SCOPE OF WORK — NOT ISSUED. An authorised person must approve the scope, fees and timing before release. This example creates no project, agreement, system update or customer message.

Scope & controls

SIGMA reviews the process and designs the proposed workflow. A working pilot or system connection is considered only after delivery capability, technical feasibility and scope are confirmed. Review work has agreed outputs, timing and fees; the initial 30-minute call is free.

A person validates requirements, prices and terms before release. Missing information remains flagged. Use permitted records, a named reviewer and a manual fallback. No existing email, CRM or meeting-platform connection is offered here.

How an evaluation would work

Establish a comparable baseline and representative test cases. Include human checking, corrections and exceptions when measuring the complete process.

Compare completeness, rework, handling time and cost per reviewed enquiry.

These are evaluation measures, not achieved results or promised savings.

Review the delivery approach and decision gates

Before you start

What do we need to get started?

A description of how enquiries arrive, a blank response template and a few redacted examples are useful starting points. We agree the required information and scope before a paid review.

Will proposals be sent automatically?

No. A person approves the response before release; the prepared example sends nothing.

Can it set prices or decide which work to accept?

No. An authorised person decides scope, prices and terms. Missing values stay unresolved in a draft.

Does this already connect to our CRM or email?

No existing CRM or email connection is offered on this page. The review can begin with permitted records supplied manually.

What would a pilot establish?

If a pilot is approved, it would test draft quality, review effort, exceptions and total cost against a baseline. It may lead to a continue, revise or stop decision.

Talk through one workflow.

Also explore meeting actions and project reporting

Book a Free 30-Minute Call Prefer to write? Tell us about your workflow Try the free AI & Automation Readiness Check

Ready to request a scoped review?

A commissioned review produces the agreed process map, templates and recommendations. Scope, timing and fees are confirmed before work begins.

Request a scoped opportunity review What the review includes

Also view the fictional Business Priority Brief management sample

Management samples are not outputs of a live AI system or a client deployment.