Copying between systems
Someone re-keying orders, leads or tickets from one tool into another every single day.
[ AI & Automation / n8n & Workflow Automation ]
Every business has someone moving data between two systems that should already talk to each other. That work is repetitive, error-prone, and almost always automatable in days rather than months.
Usually days, not months · Self-hosted option · Fixed scope
[ What to automate ]
The best candidates are boring, frequent and rule-based. If a person follows a written procedure to do it, it can probably be automated.
Someone re-keying orders, leads or tickets from one tool into another every single day.
A weekly spreadsheet assembled by hand from four dashboards, taking half a day every time.
Two systems with no native connector, bridged by a person and a clipboard.
Requests waiting in an inbox because nothing routes or notifies automatically.
The same customer record maintained in three places, diverging a little more each week.
A follow-up nobody sent because it depended on a person remembering.
[ How it works ]
The current process written out step by step, with volume and error rate. Some steps get deleted rather than automated, which is the cheapest possible improvement.
Workflows built and tested against real data, with error handling, retries and a clear path for the cases that genuinely need a human.
Failure alerting so a broken workflow surfaces immediately, plus documentation your team can use to change it themselves.
[ What actually changes ]
n8n by default, since self-hosting keeps your data in your infrastructure and removes per-operation pricing. Make.com is a fine alternative if you prefer fully managed.
[ Example engagement ]
Orders re-keyed by hand from a marketplace into an ERP, plus a weekly report assembled manually from three systems. Both replaced with monitored workflows.
Illustrative example of a typical engagement. Figures vary with the state of your systems and are not a guarantee of a specific outcome.
[ Free · 30 minutes ]
Describe the repetitive process and roughly how often it happens. I will tell you whether it is worth automating and what it would cost, honestly.
[ Pricing ]
Tell me the number you have to work with. I'll tell you honestly what's achievable within it — and if it isn't enough, I'll say so before we start rather than halfway through.
Scope agreed in writing, price agreed in writing, before any work starts. No hourly creep and no invoice you haven't already approved.
For ongoing work — maintenance, monitoring, updates and small changes. Month to month, cancel whenever, no minimum term.
For a single bug or a short task where writing a full scope would cost more than simply doing the work.
Budget too tight for the whole thing? I'll often suggest doing the highest-value part first and the rest later, rather than doing all of it badly.
[ Questions ]
n8n if you want to self-host, keep data in your own infrastructure and avoid per-operation pricing at volume. Make.com if you would rather someone else run the platform. Both are good, and volume usually decides it.
No, but it is often worth it. Self-hosted n8n runs on a small server for a fixed monthly cost regardless of volume, and sensitive data never leaves your infrastructure. I can set that up as part of the work.
Failure alerting is part of every build, so you know immediately rather than discovering it weeks later. Retries handle transient failures, and anything that cannot be retried safely routes to a human.
If it has an API, yes. If it does not, there are usually options via the database or scheduled exports, though they are less elegant. I will tell you which situation you are in early.
In my experience it removes the worst part of people's jobs rather than the jobs. The realistic outcome is that the same team stops doing data entry and gets back to work that needs judgment.
[ Related services ]
[ Let's talk ]
Describe it in a few lines and you'll get a straight answer on scope, cost and timeline — same working day, from the person who'd actually build it.