Skip to content
Syntheon AI

Workflow Assessment

The Syntheon Workflow Assessment

Describe how a process runs today and we identify where an agentic system could take the work, where human control must stay, and what it would be worth. Here is a complete example.

How it works

  1. 1

    Describe the workflow

    One paragraph on how the work runs today: the volume, the people involved, the systems and the controls.

  2. 2

    Confirm what we read

    We show the workflow, volume and systems we identified so you can correct anything before the assessment runs.

  3. 3

    Receive the assessment

    A verdict, a four-part scorecard, the split between automated tasks and human control, and a suggested starting point.

Worked example. The figures are modelled from stated assumptions, not measured client results.

A complete assessment: KYC onboarding at a Nordic bank

Around 900 new corporate customers a month, six analysts, five days end to end. The assessment below is produced by the same engine that runs on your own description.

KYC ONBOARDING · BANK · NORDICS

This workflow is suitable in part, with significant human control.

Automation potential
HighRepetitive, policy-driven, with structured inputs.
Human oversight
Required at 5 of 12 stepsRisk acceptance and rejection stay with your analysts.
Integration complexity
High5 systems including core banking.
Governance sensitivity
HighDecisions affect the customer relationship.

Recommended starting point: discovery first

High governance sensitivity combined with high integration complexity means we scope the integrations before committing to a pilot timeline.

The workflow as we understood it

You run KYC onboarding for a bank in the Nordics, at roughly 900 onboardings a month. 6 people carry the work, and the effort is spread across retrieval, interpretation and writing it all down. End to end it takes about 5 days, most of which is waiting rather than deciding.

Where the effort goes today

  • Chasing documents and re-checking what is already on file
  • Assembling evidence by hand into a document nobody reads twice
  • Re-deriving the same policy interpretation case after case
  • Waiting on a second opinion before a case can move

The architecture we would build

Inputs

  • Core banking or policy administration system
  • Onboarding or CRM case record
  • Company and beneficial ownership registries
  • Sanctions and PEP screening provider
  • Document store for evidence

Agentic workflow

  1. 1Retrieve

    Application, registries, screening data

  2. 2Analyse

    Completeness against your onboarding policy

  3. 3Investigate

    Ownership chain and open questions

  4. 4Recommend

    Draft risk summary with sources

  5. 5Execute

    File the decision and its evidence

Control layer

Permissions·Evidence·Human approval·Audit trail

The split

What the system does

  • Retrieves customer data across source systems and registries
  • Extracts and structures documents
  • Applies your onboarding policy to the case
  • Assembles the evidence file
  • Drafts the risk summary with sources attached
  • Routes the case to the right queue
  • Chases outstanding information

What stays with your team

  • Accepting or rejecting the customer relationship
  • Accepting residual risk
  • Any regulatory judgement call
  • Cases the system flags as unusual or outside policy
  • Final sign-off on higher-risk files

The judgement stays with your team. The assembly does not.

These steps are not candidates for automation. They are the reason the system is safe to run.

Systems and data likely involved

  • Core banking or policy administration systemstated
  • Onboarding or CRM case recordtypical for this workflow
  • Company and beneficial ownership registriesstated
  • Sanctions and PEP screening providerstated
  • Document store for evidencestated

Anything marked typical is our inference, not a fact about your estate.

Controls included from day one

  • Role-based access
  • Structured audit logs
  • Human-in-the-loop review on sensitive steps
  • GDPR-conscious architecture and data residency agreed per engagement
  • Documentation structured to EU AI Act Annex IV expectations, applied as a voluntary standardCustomer onboarding and financial crime workflows are not automatically classified as high-risk under Annex III. We document to that standard by choice, so the evidence exists if your classification changes.

Indicative impact

990 h

Manual hours removed per month

5 d → 3 d

Lead time, before and after

EUR 650,000

Indicative annual value

Equivalent to roughly 7.1 full-time equivalents of analyst capacity returned to judgment work.

Illustrative modelling based on the assumptions below, not a measured result or a commitment. Actual outcomes depend on workflow complexity, data quality and integration scope. We measure real results during the pilot.

These are our starting assumptions. Change them to yours.

900 onboardings x 120 minutes = 1,800 hours a month. 55% removable = 990 hours. At 55 EUR an hour, EUR 650,000 a year.

Next step

We would start with standard-risk corporate onboarding, excluding exceptions and politically exposed cases: the system assembles the file, checks it against your policy and drafts the risk assessment, while the rating and the approval stay with your analysts. That slice is large enough to matter and narrow enough to validate in 2 to 4 weeks.

Worked example. The figures are modelled from stated assumptions, not measured client results.

Run this on your own workflow

Two minutes, one paragraph. You receive the assessment and a downloadable brief without a sales call.

Common questions

What is a Workflow Assessment?
A short, structured opinion on whether one operational workflow is a good candidate for an Agentic AI System. It names what a system could handle, what should stay with a person, and what it would take to run it in a regulated environment.
How long does it take?
About two minutes. You describe how the work runs today in one paragraph, correct anything we read wrong, and the assessment is produced immediately.
Will you tell us if the workflow is not a good fit?
Yes. Low volume or highly variable work often does not justify an agentic system, and the assessment says so plainly rather than proposing a pilot.
Do we have to speak to anyone?
No. You receive the assessment and a downloadable workflow brief without a sales call. We only follow up if you ask us to.