Skip to content

AI Lab

Opportunity Intelligence

How a first assessment works: from a business problem, through the questions that matter, to a structured view of where AI or automation could help, what it might be worth, and what to test first.

About this tool: Worked examples prepared by Plerosis. Not generated live, and not based on real clients. Each statement is tagged as a fact from the brief, a calculation, or an assumption to test.

The brief

A UK wholesale distributor with about 60 staff. A finance team of four handles around 1,500 supplier invoices a month.

“Our finance team spends days each month chasing invoices that don’t match purchase orders.”
  1. Follow-up question 1

    How are invoices received and entered today?

    By email as PDFs, keyed into the accounting system by hand, about 8 minutes each.

  2. Follow-up question 2

    What usually causes a mismatch?

    Price or quantity differences against the purchase order, and occasional duplicates. Around 4% of invoices need rework.

  3. Follow-up question 3

    What does a mismatch cost you?

    Staff time to investigate, supplier calls and sometimes late-payment charges: roughly £60 each.

The report

The strongest opportunity is automated invoice capture with rule-based matching, with people handling only the exceptions. It is a well-proven pattern with clean, structured data.

  • Automated capture and PO matching

    Feasibility
    High
    Data needed
    Invoice PDFs, purchase orders, goods received notes
    Integration
    Reads the invoice inbox; writes to the accounting system
    Governance
    People approve every exception; full audit trail
  • Exception triage assistant

    Feasibility
    Medium
    Data needed
    History of past mismatches and how they were resolved
    Integration
    Read-only access to accounting records
    Governance
    Suggestions only; a person decides
  • Supplier master data checks

    Feasibility
    High
    Data needed
    Supplier records, bank and VAT details
    Integration
    Accounting system
    Governance
    Changes to bank details always verified by a person

Value estimate: change any number

Fact
Fact
Assumption
Fact
Fact
Assumption
Assumption
Assumption
Assumption

Net annual benefit

Calculated

£49,600

Payback
8.5 months
3-year net return
£113,800
Staff hours released a year
1,200

If the time saving is half what was assumed: £31,600 a year.

Suggested proof of concept

Run automated capture and matching on one month of historical invoices, in parallel with the current process.

Success criteria
At least 90% of fields read correctly; every true mismatch flagged; no invoice posted without a match or a person’s approval.
Decision at the end
Implement, refine the rules, or stop.

Assumptions to test

The 50% time saving depends on invoice layout consistency across suppliers; implementation cost depends on the accounting system’s integration options.

Want this for your own problem?