01 — Bounded workflow map
The start and end state, owner, inputs, outputs, systems, exceptions and action boundary.
Fixed-scope decision engagement
Decide whether one workflow is worth building.
The State Method Diagnostic tests one AI-assisted workflow before implementation expands. It maps the operating boundary, examines representative cases, defines permissions and failure routes, and records what the evidence supports. It is not a small production implementation.
- Fee
- €4,000 excluding VAT
- Elapsed duration
- 10 business days
- Delivery effort
- Approximately five delivery days
- Scope
- One controlled workflow
- Core output
- Five decision artifacts and a go/no-go recommendation
- Continuation
- No obligation to commission a pilot
The buyer problem
Turn an untested assumption into a bounded decision.
You have a repetitive process and a plausible AI-assisted step, but the decision to build is still based on a demo, a small sample or an untested assumption. The current baseline may be incomplete. Edge cases, tool permissions, review effort and failure handling are unclear. The Diagnostic turns those unknowns into a bounded decision.
Inputs required
Bring representative, authorized operating evidence.
Depending on the workflow, State Method may request:
- Up to three stakeholder interviews
- Up to three data or document categories
- Approximately 5–10 representative sanitized examples
- Existing process documentation
- Current workflow volume
- Current time, cost or error baseline
- Known exceptions and difficult cases
- Relevant security and privacy constraints
Share sanitized, authorized material through an agreed delivery channel. Do not send source documents through the public assessment form.
Diagnostic work
Inspect the full path from input to reviewed outcome.
State Method identifies the workflow owner and maps the current path from input to reviewed outcome. Inputs, outputs, systems, exceptions and consequential actions are bounded. Representative cases are inspected against the manual baseline. Uncertainty and known failure modes are recorded. Model tasks are separated from deterministic checks, permissions and approval. Logging, stop and recovery requirements are defined. The final evidence is used to make a go/no-go recommendation and, when justified, outline a Controlled Pilot.
Five decision artifacts
The output is evidence for a decision.
02 — Evaluation summary
Representative cases, observed behavior, uncertainty, edge cases, baseline comparison and evidence gaps.
03 — Permission matrix
What the model may propose, what software may enforce or execute and what a named person must approve.
04 — Observable failure register
Failure modes, detection signals, stop conditions, escalation, retries, fallback and recovery route.
05 — Go/no-go recommendation
Proceed, change the design, gather evidence, remain manual or stop, with the reasons and unresolved assumptions.
Optional when justified: Controlled Pilot specification.
Example timeline
Ten business days from boundary to review.
Business days 1–2 — Bound
Kickoff, stakeholder input, workflow map, baseline and evidence review.
Business days 3–5 — Evaluate
Representative cases, exceptions, uncertainty, failure modes and comparison criteria.
Business days 6–7 — Control and Recover
Permissions, approvals, deterministic checks, logging, stops and recovery.
Business days 8–9 — Decide
Synthesize the five artifacts and draft the recommendation.
Business day 10 — Review
Walk through the evidence, recommendation and possible next steps.
Timing depends on timely access to agreed stakeholders and sanitized inputs. The fee and elapsed duration cover the stated one-workflow boundary.
Qualification boundary
Good fit and explicit exclusions.
Good fit
- One process with a clear start, end and owner
- A repetitive manual or partly automated step
- Representative examples that can be sanitized
- A baseline for time, cost, volume or errors, or a practical way to establish one
- Outputs that can be reviewed
- A real choice about whether to invest in a pilot
The Diagnostic does not include
- Production deployment
- Open-ended AI strategy
- Custom model training at scale
- Large-scale data labeling
- A security audit
- Legal advice
- Professional or regulatory sign-off
- Unrestricted production access
- Autonomous consequential actions
- Guaranteed ROI or accuracy
After delivery
Proceed, change, gather evidence, remain manual or stop.
The Diagnostic closes with one of five recommendations: proceed to a separately scoped Controlled Pilot, change the proposed workflow, gather better evidence, keep the current manual process or stop. The client may use the artifacts internally and is not required to continue with State Method. If prior evidence already resolves some questions, a later-stage engagement can be considered after review.
FAQ
Before the next decision.
Does the Diagnostic include implementation?
No. It is a decision engagement. It may include limited technical evaluation needed to support the decision, but it does not include a deployed production workflow.
What counts as one workflow?
One workflow has a clear trigger, owner, inputs, output, review path and end state that can share one set of acceptance criteria. Separate owners, outcomes or authority boundaries usually indicate separate workflows.
Do the examples need to be clean?
No. Representative messy cases can be useful. They must be authorized, safely shareable and sufficient to identify what should be tested. The Diagnostic is not a large-scale data-cleaning engagement.
What if the recommendation is no-go?
The reasons and evidence are recorded. The right result may be to narrow the scope, improve the inputs, retain manual work or avoid spending on a pilot.
Is the Diagnostic mandatory before a pilot?
Not always. State Method can review existing evaluation, ownership and control evidence. If it is sufficient, pilot scoping may start later in the path.
Continue with the evidence
Review the next relevant boundary.
Workflow assessment / first step
Test the decision before funding the build.
Share one workflow, its current baseline and who reviews the output. Business context only.