Platform automation
Salesforce Flow, scheduled jobs, platform events. The first choice when the work lives in one platform. Nothing to host, and your admin can read it.
Every place a person copies data from one screen into another is a handoff. Each one adds delay, drops context, and fails quietly. We find them, rank them by what they cost, and remove them one at a time.
What a manual step costs
So they look free. A person copies a few fields and the work moves on. The cost lands later, on someone else, under a different name.
A manual handoff charges three times. None of the charges shows up on an invoice.
The work waits in an inbox. It waits for the person who does the copying to get to it, and it waits again if they are out. A form that arrives on Friday is in the system on Monday, and the customer counts the weekend.
A field re-keyed is a field re-keyed wrong some of the time. Nobody notices at the keyboard. The wrong copy is the one downstream trusts, so the error travels, and the first person to find it is the one holding the invoice.
The reason for the decision stays in the sender's head. The record carries the fields and loses the why. Six months later someone asks why the discount was approved, and the answer is in a thread nobody can find.
Where handoffs hide
Illustrative
The process below is invented, and the pattern is from almost every intake flow we have seen.
In this order
Plainly
Salesforce Flow, scheduled jobs, platform events. The first choice when the work lives in one platform. Nothing to host, and your admin can read it.
Direct calls between systems, with retries, idempotency keys, and a dead-letter queue. The second choice, and most of the work.
An integration platform when there are many systems and the flows change often. We will tell you when it is not worth the license.
A scheduled job or a tiny service when the platforms cannot talk. Written in your repository, in a language your team reads.
For the step in the middle that needs judgment: classify, match, summarize, draft.Read how we build agents.
The step that should stay human stays human. The automation brings the work to them with everything attached.
Handed over
Answered plainly
Usually not. Most handoffs are removed with what you already license. The platforms on each side have APIs, and one of them usually has an automation tool built in.
When that is not true, we say so before you spend anything, and we show you the smallest thing that would work.
Then we fix the process first, in the map. Automating a bad process makes it fail faster.
The map makes this visible. A step that exists because of an old workaround shows up as a handoff with no reason behind it, and we take it out before we build anything.
It removes re-keying. The people keep the decisions, and the work reaches them cleaner than it did.
The step that needs a person stays with a person. The automation brings them the record with everything attached, so the time they spent copying goes to the judgment the job was for.
Every integration has a contract test and a failure path that reaches a person. A changed field fails loudly on the first record, not silently on ten thousand.
The failure carries the record and the reason, so the person who gets it can fix it and replay it without opening a ticket.
Yes. The build lives in your repository, and your team reviews every change. We work inside your release process, not around it. When we leave, the runbook is theirs.
One cycle for most. The map tells us which ones are bigger before we start, and you approve the number first.
A cycle is short on purpose. You use each handoff as soon as it is removed, so nothing waits for a launch.
Start with one
Tell us the one your team complains about. We map it, score it, and say what it would take to remove.