What does a manual handoff really cost your People team?
Compare the human work that remains under two ways of running the same monthly changes. A connector can shorten each routine update and still leave your team with harder exceptions. Put both in the calculation before buying a platform or a service.
Fictional starting example. All time and valuation figures below are planning assumptions, not measured provider results or provider charges. Nothing entered here is sent or saved.
Edit the workload
Worked result
Design B leaves 135 fewer People minutes each month (2 hours 15 minutes).
| Work | Design A | Design B |
|---|---|---|
| Routine: 40 changes × touch time | 40 × 6 = 240 min | 40 × 2 = 80 min |
| Exceptions: 5 × extra effort | 5 × 20 = 100 min | 5 × 25 = 125 min |
| Remaining People work | 340 min | 205 min |
At a chosen £35 per People hour, the 135 minute monthly difference is worth £78.75 of capacity. Design B asks for 12 People hours to set up: 720 ÷ 135 = 5.33 months to recover in time. Over six months it releases 6 × 135 − 720 = 90 minutes, valued at £52.50. This is a capacity model, not a cash saving or a complete purchase case.
Exception test: The monthly advantage is 160 − 5 × exception count minutes. At 32 exceptions among 40 changes, the designs tie at 880 minutes each; at 33, B leaves five more minutes of work than A. On these assumptions, B earns a pilot only if the change volume persists and the exception burden stays below that tipping point.
What to count next
Enter extra exception minutes on top of routine touch. Include every People approval and check that survives the proposed design. Change the assumed minutes only when a demonstration shows the record moving correctly or a service owner agrees to take the investigation forward.
Next action: Time one real month, then test the highest-work handoff with the final candidates. Ask who corrects a failed record before replacing your current workflow.