Fixed price, agreed in writing — after a 20-minute conversation.

You can buy it directly. A support professional who wants to close three times as many tickets without dropping quality, an accountant working through reconciliations, a lawyer summarising discovery, a recruiter writing outreach that does not read as machine-written — each of those is a legitimate engagement on its own terms, with no employer involved. The intake is identical to the enterprise version: your real work, your real files, a roadmap built for how you actually operate. Scope, format and timing are agreed in writing before anything begins, and the sessions are yours alone. Nothing you did not know at the start is reported to anyone, because there is nobody in the arrangement to report it to.

Progress at the level of the organisation, never a transcript of anyone’s session. The sponsor receives the agreed objectives, roadmap coverage across the people named in the engagement, completion against the written schedule, the themes that recurred — the tool nobody knew existed, the policy everyone was quietly working around — and the automation candidates the intakes surfaced. What the sponsor does not receive is who asked which basic question, who needed a second session, or who was slowest to start. That boundary is stated to everyone before their intake, because confidentiality is what makes an intake honest, and honest intakes are the only ones worth building a roadmap from.

The intakes are an unusually accurate automation diagnostic, and they feed straight into it. Sitting with people individually and watching them work surfaces the same task done a dozen different ways, the export nobody automated, and the three steps every one of them repeats by hand every morning — which is precisely the input a Workflow Automation Sprint or an AI Agent Build needs. Where something turns out to be worth building rather than teaching, it is written up as a ranked candidate with an hours-saved estimate and the assumptions stated, so you can challenge it. The two are quoted separately and neither is a condition of the other. Teaching a person to do a task faster is the wrong answer when the task should never have reached them.

Model and third-party SaaS costs are billed to your own accounts and are never resold through me — I do not want to carry token-price risk on your behalf and you should not pay a margin on it. Every AI build ships with a cost-per-conversation or cost-per-run projection so the monthly number is known before launch rather than discovered afterwards. Ongoing support is optional, quoted monthly against the tier you choose, and never bundled into the build price.

It is quoted per engagement rather than published, because the same brief can differ by a factor of three depending on your systems. Six things decide it: how many systems it touches, whether those systems have a usable API, how clean the data is, how much of the process is already written down, the corpus size and channel for an agent, and whether the output is customer-facing or internal. You get a fixed written price after a twenty-minute call, usually within twenty-four hours of it, and that price does not move afterwards — two revision rounds are included and anything outside the written scope caps is agreed before it happens.

Because a published number would have to be padded to cover the worst case, which means straightforward projects subsidise difficult ones. The alternative — advertising a low number and discovering the gap in week two — is how fixed-price projects turn into arguments. Instead the entire commercial structure is published: what drives the number, what is included at no extra charge, the payment milestones, the change-order rule, and the tax treatment. Only the amount waits for a short conversation about your actual situation.

Every enquiry gets a reply within one business day, from the person who would do the work rather than an automated sequence. After a twenty-minute fit call, a written fixed-price proposal typically follows within twenty-four hours, containing the scope caps, deliverables, timeline and payment schedule. There is no multi-week procurement dance, because there is no sales team to route it through.

That is the expected end state, and the build is structured for it. Everything is in version control with a runbook, prompts are versioned files rather than text pasted into a web interface, and the handover session is recorded. Your engineer can pick it up by reading the repository. There is no proprietary layer of mine in the middle that has to be replaced first.

Numeric caps written into the statement of work before you pay — how many processes, how many integrations, how many revision rounds, how many documents. Two revision rounds are included. Anything beyond the caps is a change order, quoted and agreed in writing before any work happens, at the rate stated in your statement of work. The fixed price does not move because the scope does not move quietly.

It is a fair question and the honest answer shapes how everything is built. Because the work lives in your infrastructure, in your version control, with a runbook and an evaluation suite, any competent engineer can take over without me — that is the point of building it this way rather than faster and looser. Delivery capacity is deliberately capped so schedules are not built on optimism, and for larger engagements I will name trusted subcontractors in advance rather than after a problem.

The centre of the practice is B2B services and B2B SaaS companies of roughly 10 to 200 people, with a named decision-maker and a manual operations bottleneck — large enough that a process eats real hours every week, small enough that one accountable engineer beats a vendor team. Individual professionals engage directly at one end, and larger organisations commission scoped rollouts one department at a time at the other. Where it is genuinely not a fit: pre-revenue startups looking for a technical co-founder, and open-ended "what can AI do for us" exploration with no process, no owner and no number attached.