JAWC builds AI into the tools and processes your business already uses, starting with the work that takes up the most time. You choose which tasks run automatically, such as confirmations and reminders, and which need a person's approval.
Our own U.S. team builds and manages each workflow. We review your systems, the quality of your data, and how the automation will interact with customers. Then we put the work and price in writing before we build the automation.
If any of these sound familiar, we can give your team some of that time back. The pilot below starts with one workflow.
Not everything should be automated, and most of what gets sold as AI transformation never touches the work that actually costs you the day. These four are where the hours really sit in a business: the first response, the quote, the booking, and the admin tail at the end of the week. We start with whichever one of them is costing you the most.
Every inquiry acknowledged right away, sorted by what it actually is, and put in front of the person who handles it.
The quote is drafted from details you already captured.
One source of truth for what is booked, and the confirming back and forth handled without a person in the middle of it.
Your numbers, notes and open tasks pulled into one weekly summary, done before the morning starts.
We automate one workflow at a time, starting with the work that takes your team the most time. The pilot below shows how we test it before choosing the next task. For a clinic that might be appointment reminders, and for an HVAC company tune-up reminders, which work alongside marketing a medical practice and HVAC company marketing. See all JAWC services
Every workflow we build has the same shape: something happens, the model does the work, and then it either sends or stops and waits, on rules you set.
Routine messages like confirmations and reminders can go out on their own. Anything with judgment in it waits for a person to approve it, edit it, or discard it. That gate is part of the build, and the off switch next to it is yours.
Sent
Held
To a person
Choose A, B, or C to compare runs.
The rules you set, the person who releases, and the record of every run.
NIST's AI Risk Management Framework
Rules sheetWhich messages count as routine and go out on their own. Written with you before the build, and changed whenever you say.
Held for a person to release
Off switchYour team must approve anything that needs judgment before it sends.
SentWent out on the rules you setHeldWaited for a person to release itTo a personHanded over with a noteYour accounts hold the run records used in the monthly summary below.
We start with one workflow and leave the rest of your systems as they are. We take that workflow, build it, and run it beside the way you do it now until there is something real to compare. At the end of four weeks you have a working automation and an honest answer about whether it was worth it.
We sit with whoever actually does the work and write down every step as it really happens, including the parts that are not in any process document. Then we time it. Without that, there is nothing honest to measure against later.
We build the automation in your real systems. Anything that needs judgment goes through a human approval step. Nothing sends and nothing changes a live record yet: it drafts, it holds, and we check the output before anything depends on it.
The old way keeps running. The automation runs alongside it, producing the same work for comparison without sending a message or touching a booking. This is the week that makes the difference between trusting it and hoping.
We put the two side by side: the hours it took before, the hours it takes now, what it got wrong and what a person had to step in for. Then it stays, it changes, or it gets switched off. All three are real answers. If it stays, only the routine messages you have approved send automatically. Everything else waits for a person.
Software does not get tired. It also does not care.
Automate the repetition.
Keep the judgment.
How it fits together
You have seen the rule. This is what your team actually sees when it runs: the inbox, the draft, and the calendar, for one water heater job from first message to booked slot.
See it from your team's side. Example: a service business with one shared inbox
Shared inboxAfter hours
Thanks for reaching out. Yes, we replace water heaters. Which city are you in, and is the current unit gas or electric?
Acknowledged right away, sorted by what it is, and put in front of the right person.
The inquiry lands with whoever handles it.
Draft quoteHeld, waiting for a personUnit, labor and permit filled from the intake notes. The draft waits at the gate.
Quotes use your notes and pricing and send only with a person's approval.
Your calendarThis weekConfirmed for Thursday morning. We will text you a reminder the day before.
One booking, one calendar, confirmed and reminded without a person in the middle of it.
Confirmations and reminders go out on their own under the rules you set. Each one is logged.
Five questions to ask before anyone automates your work, including us.
You can check each answer against your monthly summary or the written plan you get before we build.
Automation monthly summary
Hours returnedBy workflowTime given back, traced to the workflow that returned it.
Runs this monthSent, held, handed offEvery run in one of three columns, all written down.
One workflow, named, with the hours it takes today. The summary shows that workflow and the time it took before anything was built.
Your rules allow routine messages to send automatically. A person must approve, edit or discard everything else. The summary records what sent and what waited.
In your accounts and your systems, documented well enough that another developer could take it over. The summary names where it lives.
A comparison against how long the work took before. The summary shows the hours returned each month.
The summary lists each exception and what we changed because of it, and the Fit, reviewed row records what we checked before recommending the build at all.
If someone on your team has the time to build it, and will still own it after the person who built it moves on, doing it in-house is a real option. If not, one team that maps the workflow, builds the gate, runs the pilot, and stays responsible for it afterward covers more ground for the same attention.
The one task your team dreads every week, the systems it touches, and roughly how long it takes. That is enough for us to start the workflow map.
See which of your workflows would be worth automating first.
An automation gets built one of three ways: have an agency build it into the way you already work, hire someone to build it in-house, or build it yourself with a tool. The table below shows what the three look like once they are running.
| What to compare |  JAWC |
Hiring in-house | Doing it yourself |
|---|---|---|---|
| Who does the work |  Our own U.S. team, the same people every month |
One developer you employ | You, between other jobs |
| How approval works | Routine messages follow your rules; judgment waits for a person |
Depends on the gate your developer builds | You decide when to review |
| What it runs on | The systems and data you already have |
The systems and data you already have | A single-system tool, usually |
| How you know it works | A parallel run against the way you do it now |
The measures your developer selects | Usage counts, when the tool provides them |
| When it goes wrong | The work waits for a person, as it does today |
It waits for the person who understands it | You check for issues |
| What you are left with | A workflow in your accounts, documented and yours |
A working automation, and one person who knows how | A subscription, and your work inside it |
| Pricing | Quoted after the workflow map. Same summary format at every level |
A salary, employment costs and the tools | The tool subscription, plus your nights and weekends |
If you are weighing the cost, the next section shows what you get for it, in the same format every month.
Every workflow keeps a record of what it handled, what it held back, and where a person had to step in, and that record comes to you in the same plain-English format every month. If the exceptions column starts growing, we treat it as a signal and act on it.
Same format, every workflow
Runs
Held
Exceptions
Your summary covers the workflow in your plan.
Hours returned, traced to the workflow that returned them
Triage
Quotes
Booking
AdminSee the hours returned, measured against how long the work used to take.
Review what was held, what was edited, and where a person had to step in, not just the runs that went smoothly.
Understand what we changed, what it is meant to fix, and what we recommend automating next.
Your quote
The price depends on how many tasks you want automated and how many of your software tools have to share information.
Starts with the task that is taking the time.
How much work it takes depends on the software you use, the information in it, and how you do the task today.
Tasks
Software connections
Data
Customer contactSometimes the answer is no, and we tell you before you spend anything. If the process is broken, automating it only breaks it faster and at a higher volume. If there is not enough of the work to matter, the automation costs more attention than it gives back. And if the reason customers stay is that a particular person handles them, that is not a cost to remove.
When the answer is yes, it is usually because the work is genuinely repetitive, the information needed to do it already exists somewhere in your systems, and the only thing standing between the two is somebody finding the time. That is the shape of a workflow worth automating.
The National Institute of Standards and Technology counts human oversight and a written record of what a system did as part of managing the risk of using AI. Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0), NIST, U.S. Department of Commerce, published January 2023.
We have handled our own inquiries, quotes and bookings since 2011, which tells us which parts should stay with a person.
Ask us whether yours is worth automating
If you have an automation question we have not answered, call us. We will tell you what the automation work includes.
The price depends on the workflows you need, the systems we must connect and the condition of your data. We map out the first task, then put the price in writing before anything is built.
It is a company that builds AI into the workflows a business already runs, so you are not left running software yourself. We map a manual task, build the automation and remain responsible for it. Work that needs judgment requires human approval.
We connect the systems you already use so nobody has to retype information, then add AI for straightforward decisions that come up repeatedly. Most of the work is not the model. It is understanding the workflow properly and deciding what the automation is not allowed to do on its own.
Your team can, if someone will still own the automation after the person who built it moves on, because that is what usually goes wrong. We build it, document it, and stay responsible for it, which is what you are paying for.
There is no software product here to buy or resell; what we build lives in your accounts, not on a platform of ours. It is not hosting, and it is not a security product, because we do not sell either. And it is not staff replacement. Automation handles repeatable tasks; your people keep the judgment.
Only routine messages you authorize, such as confirmations and reminders, send automatically. Everything else waits for a person to approve, edit or discard it. Your off switch stops the workflow while the manual process stays available.
Whatever fits your systems, which usually means the software you are already paying for plus a current commercial model. We are not a reseller for any platform, so there is no incentive to push you toward one. The automation stays in your accounts with documentation another developer can use.
It stays in the accounts you already own, with one exception we name in writing: the specific text a model needs in order to draft a piece of work goes to the model provider. Before anything is built, we list what leaves, where it goes and how long it is kept. Access is limited by role, every run is logged, and every workflow has a fallback path that hands the work to a person. We do not claim security certifications; we describe the practices and you can check them.
A person reviews work that needs judgment before a customer sees it. The run log lets us find and fix a wrong routine message and see what needs to change.
The first workflow is usually built in the second week and running alongside your manual process in the third, with nothing sent and nothing changed until you approve the rollout. Four weeks in there is enough to compare properly and decide whether it stays.
Our U.S. team builds your automations. JAWC has been an agency since 2011. Nothing is handed to an offshore vendor you never meet, and the people you talk to are the people doing the work.
Describe the task that eats your team's time. We will tell you whether it is worth automating and what it would take.
We learn how you handle the task today, then put the work and the price in writing.
Built in-house by our U.S. team.
5.0 on Google
Customer inquiries go unanswered while your team is busy.
Your team writes the same information into every quote.
Booking details do not match across your calendars and systems.
The same job details have to be entered twice.
Confirmations and reminders get sent by hand, when someone remembers.
Putting together the weekly report takes most of a morning.
First response and inbox triage
Calls, forms, messages and emails arriving in one queue
Quotes
Intake, booking and scheduling
Reporting and routine admin
Routed towhoever quotes
Reminderscheduled
Repetitive work
Information already in your systems
Time is the only thing missing
The sorting test we run before recommending anything
Automate it
Keep the human on it
Fix it first
We learn how you handle the task today, then put the work and the price in writing.
Built in-house by our U.S. team.