The Efficiency Architects
Synthetic demonstration data
Back to site Request an audit ↗
Digital Twin Audit · Preview Report

This is how your operation
actually runs.

Meridian Fulfilment Ltd (fictional) · Carrier invoice operations · Prepared by The Efficiency Architects

Observation window 6 weeks
Systems observed 9
Capture consent-based · anonymised
Method process mining on observed events
Invoice lines observed
21,460
6-week window
Exceptions raised
4,914
22.9% of lines
Handling variants discovered
14
SOP documents 1
Cycle time spread
4m → 30d+
same exception type
Estimated annual margin leak
£412,000
≈ 3.1% of annual carrier spend
Section 01 · Process Reality

One process. Fourteen ways it actually happens.

Carrier invoice exception handling, reconstructed from observed events across 9 systems, not from the SOP binder.

Median cycle time: ≤ 1 hour 1 hour – 2 days 2 – 5 days > 5 days designed path
Observation replay · wk 6
The process, as documented: one path, four steps, ~24 minutes. This is what the binder says happens.
The process, as observed: 14 variants, 4 minutes to 30+ days. The documented path is followed in 9.2% of cases. Line thickness = case volume. Hover any line.
Section 02 · The Variant Ledger

Every variant, priced.

Each handling path observed, with volume, cycle time, and its estimated annual cost in labour, overpayment, and write-offs.

Variant Observed path Share of exceptions Median cycle Annual cost Field note
Scroll the table sideways for annual cost and field notes →
Section 03 · Cycle Time Distribution

The same exception. A 10,000× spread.

Resolution time for the 4,914 observed exceptions. The SOP target is one hour; two-thirds of cases miss it.

Section 04 · Simulated Optimisation · Causal Twin

14 variants in. 2 sanctioned paths out.

The calibrated twin replayed this operation across 10,000 simulated quarters with exceptions consolidated onto two sanctioned paths: one automated, one human-reviewed.

Mean exception cycle time
Observed
2.6 d
Simulated
1.0 d
▼ −61% ± 6%
Handling cost per exception
Observed
£6.10
Simulated
£1.95
▼ −68% ± 9%
Annual margin leak
Observed
£412k
Simulated
£96k
▼ £316k ± £41k recovered / yr

Deployment is gated, not assumed. Candidate optimisations run in shadow mode alongside the live operation: the system decides, the human decides, outcomes are compared with statistical rigour. Nothing goes live without a measured confidence interval. Figures above are simulated projections on synthetic data, shown to illustrate the method, not a client result.

Section 05 · Autonomy Diagnosis

Where this operation sits. Where it can be in two quarters.

You are here · L0.8
Target · L3 in 2 quarters
L0
Manual
Humans are the glue. Tribal knowledge, inbox-driven exception handling.
L1
Assisted
Agents draft and route; humans execute every step.
L2
Partial autonomy
Agents execute defined paths; humans approve exceptions.
L3
Conditional autonomy
Agents own the process end-to-end; humans supervise by exception.
L4
Self-optimising
The operation runs, improves, and documents itself. Humans set direction.
The framework paper

Read how the method actually works.

Self-Optimising Operations sets out the whole architecture: variant discovery, the inconsistency measure, the causal twin, and the L0 to L4 autonomy scale. Section 8 is a worked example on synthetic data showing one documented process against the fourteen routes the same work really takes.

Three follow-up emails over a fortnight, then nothing. One click to unsubscribe. No tracking, no third party, and your address is never passed to anyone. Privacy notice.

Would rather not give an email? Read the paper here. It is not gated.