Service 01 — Process Suitability Assessment
Understand what is worth automating before you commit to anything.
Three weeks. A ranked table of your candidate processes with honest guidance on which suit automated handling, which do not, and why each sits where it does.
What This Delivers
A clear picture, not a sales case for automation.
At the end of three weeks, you will have a document that tells you — plainly, without jargon — which of your processes are suited to automated handling right now, which ones might be in the future if certain things change, and which ones should remain as they are.
The table includes a cost and effort estimate for each candidate process, so you can see whether the practical case holds together before any implementation decision is made.
For management teams under pressure to adopt new tools, this kind of grounded starting point tends to be more useful than a general recommendation to modernise.
Ranked Output
A table of candidate processes ordered by suitability, with notes on what places each where it is.
Effort Estimates
Each process that warrants consideration includes a realistic estimate of what implementation and ongoing running would require.
Plain Reasoning
Processes excluded from the shortlist come with stated reasons — not vague caveats, but specific gaps or constraints that would make automation counterproductive.
The Situation
Pressure to adopt without a clear reason to.
Most organisations we speak with are not short of ideas about what could be automated. They have lists. What they are short of is a way to evaluate those lists without already knowing how these systems work — and without paying for something to be built that turns out to be the wrong thing.
There is often pressure — from leadership, from competitors, from the broader conversation about AI — to do something. That pressure rarely comes with a clear brief. Acting on it without a structured look at what your processes actually require tends to produce tools that are underused, poorly fitted, or quietly abandoned after a few months.
The issue is usually not a lack of willingness. It is the absence of a neutral starting point — something that looks at your specific situation without an interest in selling you a particular outcome. That is what this engagement is designed to provide.
Our Approach
What the assessment actually looks at.
| Factor | What We Examine |
|---|---|
| Volume | How often the process runs and whether that frequency justifies the overhead of automation setup and maintenance. |
| Variability | How much the process deviates from one instance to the next. High variability often makes automation fragile rather than useful. |
| Error tolerance | What the cost of a mistake is and whether the process has the kind of error profile that automated systems handle reliably. |
| Documentation | Whether the steps exist in written form or only in the knowledge of specific people. Undocumented processes need work before automation is feasible. |
| Historical examples | Whether there are records of the process running that a system could learn from or that validation could be measured against. |
These factors are not abstractions. Each one determines whether a particular automated system will hold up in day-to-day use or create new problems. Looking at them systematically — across all your candidate processes at once — produces a picture that is both more honest and more actionable than a general feasibility opinion.
What Working Together Looks Like
Three weeks, clearly structured.
We begin by reviewing any existing documentation and speaking directly with the people responsible for the processes you want us to look at. We ask structured questions and take detailed notes. You do not need to prepare anything elaborate — working documents and a conversation are enough.
We work through each candidate process against the assessment criteria. Where something is unclear from documents or conversation, we come back with a specific follow-up question rather than making assumptions. This week is mostly on our side, with minimal time required from yours.
We deliver the ranked output table and walk through it with you. The conversation at this stage is not a sales call — it is an opportunity to ask questions about the reasoning, and to understand what the next step would be for any process that ranks well, if you choose to pursue it.
Investment
One fixed fee. No hidden scope.
¥26,000
Fixed Fee — JPY
This covers the full three-week engagement: the intake conversation, document review, process analysis, and the written output with ranked table. There are no additional charges for follow-up questions during the engagement period.
If you decide to proceed with an implementation following the assessment, that would be scoped and quoted separately based on what the assessment finds. There is no obligation to continue.
Intake conversation with process owners (up to three hours across the engagement)
Review of existing process documentation in whatever form it exists
Assessment of all candidate processes against the five evaluation criteria
Ranked output table with suitability notes and effort estimates for viable candidates
Explicit list of processes recommended against automation, with reasoning stated
Delivery walkthrough and Q&A session to discuss findings
How We Work
Why structured assessment produces better decisions.
The five-factor framework we use — volume, variability, error tolerance, documentation quality, and historical examples — was developed to reflect what actually determines whether an automated system remains useful after initial deployment. These are not theoretical criteria. They are the things that tend to go wrong when they are not checked before implementation begins.
You receive a brief status note at the end of week one, confirming which processes are in scope and any documentation gaps we have identified. If something is missing or would be useful to gather, we let you know at that point — before the analysis week begins.
Three weeks is the minimum for this kind of work to be done properly. Compressing the timeline produces a document that looks like an assessment but lacks the depth to be useful. We do not offer shortened versions of this engagement.
Our Commitment
What you can expect from this engagement.
Honest Output
The assessment is not a document designed to justify proceeding with automation. If the honest finding is that none of your candidate processes suit automated handling at this stage, that is what the report will say. We consider that a useful outcome, not a failed engagement.
No Obligation
The initial conversation before we confirm an engagement is without charge and without commitment. You can discuss your situation, ask questions about the process, and decide whether this is the right starting point — without any pressure to proceed.
If you contact us and we conclude after the initial conversation that this engagement is not the right fit for your situation, we will say so directly and suggest what might be more useful. We would rather lose a small engagement than deliver something that does not serve you well.
Next Steps
How to get started.
Use the contact form at the bottom of the home page to introduce yourself and describe your situation briefly. You do not need a detailed brief — a paragraph about what you are trying to understand is enough.
We respond within two working days and arrange a short conversation — usually thirty minutes — to understand your situation and confirm that this engagement is the right shape for what you need.
If we proceed, we confirm the scope and start date in writing. The engagement begins with document collection and the intake conversation in week one. You will know exactly what is happening and when throughout.
Three weeks from the start date, you receive the written output and we walk through it together. What you do with it from that point is entirely your decision, with no pressure from us about next steps.
Process Suitability Assessment
Know what you are working with before you commit to anything.
A conversation about your situation is a reasonable place to start. There is no charge for that conversation and no obligation to proceed with the assessment.
Other Services
Other ways to work with Shinonome.
Building demand or workload forecasting from your company's own historical records. Includes data preparation, model selection, validation against held-back periods, and integration into your existing planning routine. Ten weeks. Suited to organisations with three or more years of consistent data.
A structured programme preparing employees to work alongside automated tools. Four sessions across six weeks, tailored to the department, using your own material. Includes a two-month question channel after sessions end. Suitable for organisations where staff have had no preparation for working with AI systems.