Practical workflow value
Recommendations are judged against operational value, available evidence and the level of human judgement required.
AI & Automation Audits for Architecture Practices
Find the workflows where AI and automation can make a practical difference.
Review the drawing, document, planning and project-information workflows that consume the most time in your practice. Identify practical opportunities, assess readiness and leave with a prioritised plan before committing budget to new tools or custom software.
Built around your real workflows, representative files and operational priorities.
01
Site plans
02
Elevations
03
Details
04
Planning docs
Review
1
Workflow review
Evidence-led decision point with human review built in.
2
Standards check
Evidence-led decision point with human review built in.
3
Opportunity score
Evidence-led decision point with human review built in.
4
Roadmap
Evidence-led decision point with human review built in.
Positioning
Not a generic AI tools review.
The service does not begin with a list of tools. It begins with how the practice currently works, where time is being lost and what evidence exists in drawings, files and internal processes.
File readiness
Recommendations are judged against operational value, available evidence and the level of human judgement required.
Implementation risk
Recommendations are judged against operational value, available evidence and the level of human judgement required.
Process
A practical process for deciding what to improve first.
01
Understand the workflow
Review repetitive tasks, bottlenecks, handovers, manual checking and process frustrations.
02
Review the evidence
Assess representative drawings, files, systems, standards and available information.
03
Prioritise the opportunities
Compare likely impact, effort, risk, readiness and dependencies.
04
Create a decision-ready roadmap
Recommend the most practical next actions, with a clear delivery sequence.
The Validation Programme also includes a limited proof of concept for one priority opportunity, tested against representative evidence.
Problems
When an architecture AI and automation audit is the right next step.
Teams spend too much time recreating, formatting or checking drawing information.
Technical details, previous drawings and project knowledge are difficult to find and reuse.
Planning packs, presentation material and document submissions involve repetitive manual preparation.
Drawing colourisation, file organisation or QA checks rely on inconsistent manual effort.
Information is repeatedly copied between folders, software and teams.
The practice wants to explore AI but does not know which workflows are worth improving first.
Leadership wants a clear plan before investing in off-the-shelf tools or custom development.
Audit options
Choose the level of evidence your practice needs.
Each package is fixed scope. Depth, stakeholder input, evidence review and deliverables increase by package.
£1,495 + VAT
Essential AI & Automation Audit
Practices that know repetitive work is consuming time but need an independent view before committing budget.
- Duration
- 2 delivery days + report and readout
- Main outcome
- A clear starting point, top recommendations and a 30 / 60 / 90-day action plan.
£4,595 + VAT
AI & Automation Discovery Sprint
Practices with more than one potential automation opportunity, workflow variation across teams, or standards that need to be understood before implementation.
- Duration
- 2-week discovery sprint
- Main outcome
- A prioritised six-month roadmap and feasibility direction for the strongest opportunities.
£6,950 + VAT
AI & Automation Validation Programme
Practices ready to investigate a meaningful automation initiative but needing evidence that a proposed use case will work with real drawings, files and operating constraints.
- Duration
- 3-week validation programme
- Main outcome
- A limited non-production proof of concept, validation evidence and a recommended production-phase scope.
| Package | Essential Audit | Discovery Sprint | Validation Programme |
|---|---|---|---|
| Best for | Practices that know repetitive work is consuming time but need an independent view before committing budget. | Practices with more than one potential automation opportunity, workflow variation across teams, or standards that need to be understood before implementation. | Practices ready to investigate a meaningful automation initiative but needing evidence that a proposed use case will work with real drawings, files and operating constraints. |
| Duration | 2 delivery days + report and readout | 2-week discovery sprint | 3-week validation programme |
| Main outcome | A clear starting point, top recommendations and a 30 / 60 / 90-day action plan. | A prioritised six-month roadmap and feasibility direction for the strongest opportunities. | A limited non-production proof of concept, validation evidence and a recommended production-phase scope. |
| Workflows reviewed | Up to 3 workflows, 10 representative files and 5 opportunities | Up to 3 workflows, 30 representative files and 8 opportunities | Up to 4 workflows, 50 samples, 10 opportunities and 1 prototype use case |
| Stakeholder engagement | One two-hour workshop plus up to three 30-minute interviews. | Up to six 45-minute interviews across relevant roles. | Up to eight 45-minute interviews plus prototype selection, test review and final workshop. |
| Drawing and file review | Lightweight review of up to 10 representative files, screenshots or process examples. | Deeper review of up to 30 representative drawings, documents or technical-detail samples. | Broad review of up to 50 representative, approved samples for assessment and testing. |
| Prototype validation | Not included | Not included | One limited non-production proof of concept |
Outputs
What you leave with.
Depth and deliverables vary by package, but every engagement is designed to help leadership make a clearer investment decision.
Workflow findings
Evidence and readiness observations
Prioritised automation opportunities
Recommended quick wins
Practical next steps
A phased roadmap
A leadership readout
Clear implementation direction where appropriate
Questions
Common questions before starting.
Is this suitable for practices using AutoCAD, Revit, ArchiCAD, Adobe or a mixture of systems?
Yes. The audit is based on your current workflows, files and standards rather than a single software platform. The depth of file review depends on the package selected.
Do we need to replace our current software?
Usually no. The audit is designed to understand where existing tools, standards and processes can be improved before recommending new software or custom development.
Will AI replace design or technical judgement?
No. The focus is on repetitive preparation, search, checking, formatting and workflow support. Human review and quality-control checkpoints remain central to the recommendations.
What drawings, documents or files will you need?
Each package defines a representative evidence limit, from up to 10 files in the Essential Audit to up to 50 samples in the Validation Programme.
Can the audit lead to a custom automation project?
Yes, where the evidence supports it. Any implementation proposal follows only after scope, dependencies and acceptance criteria are agreed.
What is the difference between the three audit options?
The packages increase in depth: Essential gives a focused diagnostic, Discovery Sprint provides deeper operational assessment, and Validation Programme adds one limited non-production proof of concept.
Is the Validation Programme prototype production-ready?
No. The prototype is a limited feasibility exercise. It does not include live integrations, deployment, user support, monitoring, data migration, security certification or guaranteed production outcomes.
Next step
Start with the workflows taking the most time.
Share the parts of your drawing, document, planning or project-information workflow that feel repetitive, difficult to manage or overly manual. The audit will help identify the most practical next step.