Legal client. 47 vendor contracts monthly. Manual review consuming 376 hours. Built automated contract analyzer. THE CLIENT'S MANUAL PROCESS: Contracts arriving. Legal downloads PDFs. Reads documents. Extracts terms into spreadsheet. Identifies renewal clauses. Checks auto-renewal. Calculates notice deadlines. Creates reminders. Reviews liability provisions. Searches for cap language. Notes indemnification. Checks IP ownership. Inspects data privacy. Scores compliance subjectively. Checks critical clauses - liability cap, termination rights, IP provisions, data privacy. Classification based on judgment. Tracks obligations manually. Deliverables, payments, renewals, insurance. Manual calendar. Routes for approval informally. Legal director for high value. General counsel for high risk. Criteria inconsistent. 8 hours per contract. 47 monthly. 376 hours consumed. Audit problems - 18 auto-renewal deadlines missed ($284K). 23 contracts missing critical clauses. 31 obligations missed ($52K penalties). 67% accuracy. THE AUTOMATION: 8-node workflow: Google Drive Trigger → Download Contract → PDF Vector Extract → Red Flag Detection → Compliance Scoring → Smart Alert Engine → Database Log → Risk Router → [Critical #legal] OR [Standard #contracts] EXTRACTION: Parties, type, dates, value, currency, payment terms/schedule, renewal clause, auto-renewal, renewal notice, termination notice, penalties, liability cap, indemnification, IP ownership, data privacy, governing law, arbitration, force majeure, SLA, audit rights, insurance, obligations RED FLAG DETECTION: Analyzes risks - unlimited liability, auto-renewal traps, evergreen terms, missing clauses, one-sided indemnification, unusual jurisdiction. Critical risk score 0-100. COMPLIANCE SCORING: Objective 0-100 score checking 10 provisions: liability cap, governing law, termination clause, renewal terms, payment terms, defined duration, IP provisions, data privacy, force majeure, indemnification. Risk level: critical (<50), high (50-70), medium (70-85), low (85+).

Manufacturing client. 80 vendor quotes monthly. Manual comparison consuming 60 hours. Built automated quote comparator. THE CLIENT'S MANUAL PROCESS: Every quote manual. Procurement specialist downloading PDF. Opening spreadsheet. Typing vendor information, line items, pricing. Calculating payment discounts manually. 2/10 net 30 terms means 2% savings if paid within 10 days. Often missed. Determining carrying costs. Delivery timeline affects inventory. Formula application inconsistent. Checking vendor credit ratings. Opening separate CRM. Recording risk assessment. Applying subjective premium. Calculating TCO. Comparing vendors manually. 45 minutes per quote. 80 monthly. 60 hours total. Audit problems - $47,200 discounts missed. $18,600 carrying costs ignored. 67 high-risk vendors selected. 37.2% error rate. THE AUTOMATION: 11-node workflow: Gmail Trigger → Get Email → Prepare Binary →PDF Vector Extract → Payment Calculator → Carrying Cost →Vendor Rating → Risk Premium → TCO Calculator → Score & Rank → Recommendation Log EXTRACTION: Vendor - name, contact, quote number, date Line Items - part numbers, quantities, prices, totals Payment Terms - net days, discount terms Delivery - estimated days, shipping Totals - subtotal, tax, shipping, grand total CALCULATIONS: Payment discount - 2/10 net 30 = 2% savings Carrying cost - (Total × 10% ÷ 365) × delivery days Risk premium - AAA=0%, AA=0.5%, A=1%, B=2%, C=3% TCO - price - discount + carrying + risk SCORING: Multi-criteria evaluation: Price (40%) - TCO comparison Delivery (25%) - Speed comparison Terms (20%) - Payment flexibility Risk (15%) - Vendor reliability Weighted score generates recommendation. DEPLOYMENT METRICS: 12 months operation. 960 quotes processed successfully. Manual comparison eliminated completely. Zero hours spreadsheet work required. Zero calculation errors occurred. Zero missed payment terms happened. Payment discount capture - 94% versus 12% manual baseline. Annual improvement totaling $67,200 captured.

Procurement company. 720 purchase orders annually. Manual validation consuming 240 hours. Built automated validator. Eliminated manual checking. THE CLIENT'S MANUAL PROCESS: Every PO manual. Specialist downloads attachment. Opens spreadsheet. Reads PO. Types details manually. Checks vendor approval. Searches approved list. Verifies vendor authorized. Compares prices. Looks up each item. Checks for price increases. Validates budget. Checks category budget. Calculates spent plus committed. Determines if PO fits. Verifies calculations. Sums line totals. Compares to subtotal. Routes for approval. Under $5K auto-approved. Over $5K requires director. 20 minutes per PO. 240 hours annually. Audit problems - 45 unauthorized vendors processed. 89 price variances not flagged. 67 budget overruns. 34 calculation errors not caught. THE AUTOMATION SOLUTION: 8-node workflow with 3-branch approval routing: Gmail Trigger → Get Email → Prepare Binary → Extract PO → Vendor Validation → Price Variance → Budget Check → 3-Way Match → Log Tracker → [Budget Alert] → [Approval Router] → [Auto-Approve OR Request Approval] Monitors inbox. PO arrives. Triggers processing. EXTRACTION: PO details - number, order date, delivery date Vendor - name, address, contact email Line items - item code, description, quantity, unit price, line total Totals - subtotal, tax amount, total amount VENDOR VALIDATION: Checks vendor name against approved vendor list. TechSupply Corp, Office Depot, Dell, HP, Amazon Business, others. Flags unauthorized vendors automatically. PRICE VARIANCE: Compares each item unit price to historical pricing database. Calculates percentage variance. Flags items with >5% price change from last purchase. BUDGET CHECK: Validates line item calculations. Verifies totals match. Checks budget utilization. Calculates (spent + committed + new PO) / total budget. Determines status - OK, Warning 80%+, Critical 90%+, Over Budget 100%+. 3-WAY MATCH: Prepares PO for future matching. Stores quantities, prices for comparison against invoice and receipt when they arrive.

THE MANUAL CHAOS 500 contracts across 15 formats 45 minutes per contract for key terms Missed review deadlines constantly Overtime costs: $3,200 weekly THE n8n TEMPLATE (14 nodes) Had this from another law firm. Adapted in 90 minutes. Multi-format receiver handles all contract types Contract classifier identifies 15 formats Key term detector finds payment, termination, renewal clauses Date extractor feeds calendar Liability finder flags indemnity clauses Confidence scorer queues uncertain items for human review DEPLOYMENT SPEED Template modification: 90 minutes Testing with their contracts: 45 minutes Production deployment: 30 minutes Training their team: 60 minutes Total setup: 3.25 hours Revenue: $4,200 setup plus $1,800/month CURRENT PERFORMANCE Daily volume: 500 contracts Processing: 2.8 minutes average per contract Accuracy: 97.6% on key terms Human review needed: 12% of contracts Time saved: 6.5 hours daily AFTER 4 MONTHS Eliminated overtime: $12,800/month saved Reduced review errors: 94% Client response time improved: 89% TEMPLATE REUSE Same base template now deployed: 6 law firms 3 real estate companies 2 insurance companies Each adaptation: 60-120 minutes Each generates: $900-1,800/month recurring Templates: n8n | Make | Zapier How many problems could your core templates solve with minor modifications?

Sent 47 cold emails using generic template. Got ghosted by 46. One reply: "Not interested." Changed my entire approach. Sent 12 emails using new 3-message sequence. Got 2 clients. $3,000 total. THE OLD WAY (DIDN'T WORK): Subject: "AI Automation Services" Body: Long explanation of what I do Call to action: "Let me know if interested" Problem: Too vague. No urgency. Easy to ignore. THE NEW 3-EMAIL SEQUENCE: EMAIL 1 - THE SPECIFIC PROBLEM: Subject: "Processing 80 invoices monthly?" Body: "Hi [Name], Noticed [Company] handles client billing. Quick question - roughly how many invoices do you process monthly? I ask because I've automated invoice processing for 3 accounting firms. Cuts manual entry time by 85%. Worth a 10-minute conversation? [Your name]" Short. Specific. Question-focused. EMAIL 2 (3 DAYS LATER IF NO RESPONSE) - THE SOCIAL PROOF: Subject: "Re: Processing 80 invoices monthly?" Body: "Hi [Name], Following up on my question about invoice processing. Just finished similar project for [Similar Company]. Their bookkeeper was spending 12 hours weekly on data entry. Now it's automated. Here's what it looks like: [Screenshot of workflow] 10 minutes to show you how this could work for [Their Company]? [Your name]" Visual proof. Similar company mentioned. Low commitment ask. EMAIL 3 (5 DAYS LATER IF STILL NO RESPONSE) - THE BREAKUP: Subject: "Closing the loop" Body: "Hi [Name], Haven't heard back so I'll assume invoice automation isn't a priority right now. If things change, here's my calendar link: [Link] Good luck with [Their Company]! [Your name]" Respectful exit. Keeps door open. Surprisingly, this one gets responses. THE RESULTS: 12 emails sent using this sequence 4 responses (33% response rate vs 2% before) 2 booked calls 2 signed deals ($1,500 and $1,500) Both clients from Email 3 (the breakup). They replied "Wait, let's talk." THE LESSON: Specific problems beat generic services. Questions beat pitches. Persistence with respect works.