← All case studies

Case study · Accounting

Read, Extract, Repeat

A Canadian accounting firm was entering a full year of client bank documents by hand to prepare year-end financials — up to 25 hours per client file, done by qualified financial staff. We built the system that reads and structures them. The same work now takes 10 hours, spent reviewing rather than typing.

Result

Before 25 hrs
After 10 hrs

per client file · one year of documents

The situation

Year-end financials require working through a year of client documents. At this firm that meant someone opening each one and typing the lines into a spreadsheet, for every client.

The time
Up to 25 hours of administrative work per client file.
The people
Done by trained financial professionals. In busy season, capacity was limited by typing speed rather than expertise.
The errors
Copying numbers for hours produces mistakes, and finding them later costs more than the entry did.

What arrives

What comes out

Date Description Amount
03/02 E-TRANSFER RECEIVED Revenue +1,240.00
03/03 CHEQUE #1042 Supplies -389.50
03/05 PAYROLL DEPOSIT Payroll +2,600.00
03/07 UTILITY PAYMENT Utilities -212.40
03/09 CARD PURCHASE Office -84.15
03/11 WIRE — UNKNOWN REF Review +3,150.00
03/14 SERVICE FEE Bank fees -14.95

A messy, handwritten record becomes a clean, classified spreadsheet.

Illustrative example, not an actual client document.

The result

Before After
Time per client file 25 hours 10 hours
Nature of the work Typing Reviewing
Limit on capacity Administrative hours Professional judgement

The remaining hours go to the part that needs a qualified person. Across a full client base, that is hundreds of hours returned without adding headcount.

"We aren't doing data entry anymore. The workflow handles the extraction, and our team simply reviews the output. It has completely changed our capacity."

Partner, Canadian accounting firm

Where else this applies

The specifics were financial documents and an accounting firm. The pattern is far broader: any business receiving paperwork in inconsistent formats and paying skilled people to retype it.

It also generalizes past documents entirely. The same approach applies to any repetitive, rule-based work that currently runs on someone's patience.

See what else we build →

Have something similar?

Tell us what the work looks like today. The first conversation costs nothing.

Book a consultation