What this is
This case was developed during an interview exercise. It is not client work, and the figures in the interactive lab are hypotheses used to explore the decision. They are not measured company results.
Frame → Map → Quantify → Prioritize → Experiment
Frame defines the business decision and the part of the billing-to-cash flow under review. Map makes handoffs, delays, exceptions and ownership visible. Quantify turns those observations into comparable value and effort assumptions.
Prioritize selects the smallest meaningful intervention. Experiment defines what evidence would justify the next decision. The method keeps the conversation on workflow change, not on a tool looking for a use case.
Data needed before a real pilot
A real assessment would need representative volumes, delay and rework rates, exception categories, current handling time, ownership, system boundaries and the cost of human review. Those inputs would replace interview assumptions before any investment decision.
The decision rules
Scale when the workflow has a named owner, evidence of meaningful value and controls the team can operate. Iterate when the opportunity remains credible but the evidence or operating design is incomplete. Stop when the expected value is weaker than the validation burden, the data is unusable or nobody owns the changed workflow.
Read before opening: the external Case Lab is an illustrative interview artifact. It contains assumptions for exploration, not client facts or measured outcomes.