The Operating Graph for the agentic enterprise

Ten minutes of talking.
Your operation, ranked and priced.

Beam Discovery interviews the people who actually do the work — nothing installed, no system access — and returns every process in a department, ranked, priced, and evidenced.

Talk to the discovery agent Talk to a person

10 minutes, free — your hypothesis ranked on screen. No email to see the result.

Claims intake & triage
Accounts9 Disagree2 Automation fit92 Opportunity€1.2M
Processes understood 5 / 14 Coverage 36%
SOC 2 Type II No system access to begin Nothing to prepare

Processing >10M AI agent tasks for Fortune 500 companies & scale-ups

Case studies Volkswagen Group ↓·BID ↓

The problem nobody owns

Ask five people how the process works.
Get five answers.

Every one of them is telling the truth. Nobody holds the whole of it — and every route to a truthful answer is already closed.

Ask your own people

Fifteen months of workshops, with the CEO in the room — and the distinction that mattered still surfaced in production, after the workshops designed to find it. Four senior answers, all sincere, all different.

Read your own documents

The SOP listed eleven email classifications; the team used six. The “30 GB” database was 132 GB. The documents describe the process as it was designed — not as it runs on a Friday afternoon.

Buy a tool for it

Mining reads every click and none of the logic — no judgment, no reason a decision was made. And a client-side install puts you behind an IT security review before it has shown you anything.

Four sincere answers from four senior people, and not one you could defend to a board — so the AI budget line reads “in progress” for a third quarter.

The product

One product. Three steps. One handoff.

Evidence from your people becomes a ranked list of what to automate — and a runbook your builders can start from. Nothing installed to begin with.

/01

An agent interviews your people

Live · in tuning
Beam askingPriya Nair · 9:40
Voice · turn 5

“Where do approvals tend to stall or get stuck?”

Listening
12 min · 8 turns · nothing installed

Talk to everyone who touches invoice approval — this week, not next quarter.

/02

Every process, ranked and priced

Beta · demo data
Opportunity map€4.5M / yr
8 candidates from 9 interviews
Invoice approval & 3-way match
€1.2M
Order-to-cash
€920K
Supplier onboarding
€610K
+ 5 more
3 observed · 4 estimated · 1 assumed

Show me every process worth automating — ranked and priced, on one page.

/03

A runbook, and the cases to test it

Human in the loop
Invoice approvalHandoff
Process flow · 11 steps
Runbook · SOPs, edge cases, gates
Golden dataset24 cases from real work
Build-ready
three days to build, not six months

Hand my team a spec they can build from — and the cases it has to pass.

this is the shape of the answer. The opportunity view — every process in the department on one field, every candidate ranked by volume, cycle time and automation fit, and every euro figure carrying its confidence: observed, estimated or assumed. Nothing is averaged into a tidier number.

Opportunities
€4.5Maddressable, this department
34processes mapped 8ranked and priced 22.9kh/yr addressable 2owners disputed
Every process in the department, by value and payback observed estimated assumed mapped, not priced
0 €100K €400K €1.2M Invoice approval & 3-way match — €1200K Vendor invoice exception handling — €340K Order-to-cash — €920K Supplier onboarding — €610K Claims intake & triage — €540K Customer onboarding (KYC) — €480K Credit memo processing — €210K Dunning & collections — €180K 01 · Invoice approval & 3-way match €1.2M · 12,400 cases/mo · observed slower payback faster payback annual value
Ranked queue · 8 candidatesGroup by: Department
#ProcessCases / mo Avg cycleAutomation fit ConfidenceOpportunity
Finance · 3 processes
01 Invoice approval & 3-way matchFinance · Accounts payable 12,400 4.2 d 92 observed €1.2M
02 Vendor invoice exception handlingFinance · Accounts payable 3,800 3.1 d 88 estimated €340K
Revenue operations · 2 processes
03 Order-to-cashRevenue operations · Billing operations 8,900 6.1 d 84 estimated €920K
Procurement · 1 process
04 Supplier onboardingProcurement · Vendor operations 1,200 11.3 d 78 estimated €610K
4 more ranked candidates · 26 processes mapped, not yet priced
The opportunity view · sample company, every figure carrying how it is known
What it finds

It finds the things nobody wrote down.

ClaimApproval thresholdOpen
Payouts over €50k are approved by email before entering the system.
Disputed 2 of 5 sources agree confidence 0.62
"Urgent ones get approved over email first. Always have."Operator · interview 3Source
"Anything over the threshold routes to finance in NetSuite."Manager · interview 1Source
"We only see it after it's already been decided."Finance · interview 5Corroborates
Sponsor and compliance not yet asked2 interviews scheduledHeld open

Maria has approved payouts over €50k by email for eleven years. Nobody had written it down. It isn't in the SOP, it isn't in NetSuite, and it would never appear in an event log — because the decision happens before anything is keyed in.

The graph surfaced it in the third interview, marked it disputed, and held it there until two more people confirmed it. It was never averaged away into a tidier answer.

That rule is now a guardrail in the claims agent — and Maria approves the edge cases.

Talk to the discovery agent Talk to a person

Large enterprises with tons of processes they don't understand that they wanna layer AI into them — you're giving them the tools to figure that out… I have not, frankly, seen anything like it.

— Chief Software Architect, Fortune 500 insurerrelayed

Proof

The bottleneck is never the build.

In every one of these, the money and the months went on working out what to build. The building itself took days — that gap is what Discovery closes.

Finding the work

Six months to find the use case. Three days to build the agent.

Six months of engagement produced no use case at all, and nobody could say which process should be next.

60 : 1finding the work, against building it
3 daysfrom documentation to a tested agent
Read the story →Primary source · measured
Email operations
€40,000

and two years, for a description that was wrong

Read →Reported figures
Debtor operations
≈6,700 hrs

a month, still done by hand while it waited

Read →Reported · hours derived
The pattern

Months to describe. Days to build. Two weeks, one department, every opportunity ranked and priced — and the description is yours either way.

Security & control

Four promises. Only one of them is a certificate.

The rest are decisions about how the product works — which is the part a security review actually reads.

Trust Center Subprocessors
Certified

SOC 2 Type II

Independently audited, end to end — discovery, the graph, and the agents that run from it. Not a single component in scope while the rest sits outside it.

Contractual

No training on your data

Zero retention. Not by us, and not by our model providers — the same clause holds all the way down the chain, and it is in the contract rather than in a blog post.

By design

Humans keep decision control

Agents prefill and propose; your people decide. Review points are defined during discovery, not bolted on when compliance asks.

Human approval requiredPayments over €50,000
By design

No system access to begin

Discovery starts with interviews, not integrations. Access is earned later, when production data is actually needed — so nothing waits on a data project.

Questions

FAQ

How is this different from process mining?

Process mining reads the exhaust — what your systems recorded after the fact. It can tell you a case took fourteen days across six systems. It cannot tell you why someone overrode the credit check, that the real approval happens over email before anyone keys it in, or that a spreadsheet is holding the process together. We watch the work instead: the people doing it, on real cases, including the parts no system ever saw.

Do you need access to our systems?

No — not to begin. Discovery runs on voice interviews and the documents you already have, plus an optional screen-share on one real case. Integrations come later, after there is a build spec and production data is genuinely needed. That ordering is deliberate: a discovery method that requires a security review before it produces anything becomes a transformation project.

What do we get in two weeks?

Five artefacts: the opportunity map — every process in the department, ranked and priced, with the evidence behind each number; the discrepancy report — where what you believe about the work diverges from how it is actually done; the build spec for the top process; the agent itself, run against cases your team already handled, with an accuracy figure; and the baseline — volumes and handling times recorded before anything changes, so the win is provable later. You keep all five whether or not you go further.

Who has to be involved?

About twenty people, thirty minutes each, once — on their own time. No workshop series, no room to book, no calendar block for your best operators: we schedule, invite and chase. You name a department; you don't even pick the process. If it costs more than that, the method is wrong.

Is our data used for training?

No. Zero retention, no training use — ours or our model providers'. It is contractual, it is in scope for the SOC 2 Type II audit, and it holds for interview recordings, transcripts, documents and production traces alike.

What do our people still decide?

Everything the graph marked as a decision. Agents prefill and propose; a person approves. Which steps carry a human review point is settled during discovery, from the way your organisation already draws that line — not from a default we picked.

What if people describe the process differently?

That is the signal, not the noise. Contradictions are kept as contradictions, marked disputed, and traced back to who said what and when. The graph then asks the question that resolves them. Averaging five accounts into a tidy sixth one is exactly how the fairy tale gets built — so we don't.

The first department

Two weeks. One department. Every automation opportunity ranked and priced.

And one agent proven against your own team's decisions.

01Opportunity map 02Discrepancy report 03Build spec for the top process 04Proven agent, with an accuracy figure 05Baseline, recorded before anything changes

You keep all five — whether or not you go further.

Talk to the discovery agent Talk to a person
SOC 2 Type II GDPR compliant Zero retention EU data residency
The discovery agent asks Which process do you already suspect is worth it? 10 min · nothing to prepare · no email to see the result
Connecting · allow microphone access
00:00 Agent  Which department should we start in?
Your potential map · buildingCollections
listening for the first one
from what you said needs a number contested

Three processes, ranked.

Two need a number before they can be priced properly, and one has a disputed owner — that disagreement is the useful part.

Email me the full map Talk to a person

This stays on screen. The email adds the evidence behind each number.