GENELLIPSE
Build a reviewable investment case using your baseline, measurable outcomes, delivery costs, and operating assumptions.
Select a benefit that can be measured against a comparable baseline. Genellipse can help connect the workflow, evaluation evidence, and commercial assumptions.
Annual hours released = comparable annual volume × minutes saved per item ÷ 60. Apply a realistic adoption and realization factor. Released capacity is not automatically a cash saving.
Subtract implementation, integration, licensing, hosting, model usage, training, support, and validation costs over the same period. Avoid double counting benefits.
Track errors, rework, exception handling, and review completeness alongside speed. A faster process is useful only if it meets the agreed acceptance criteria.
Record assumptions, evidence owners, uncertainties, and the conditions for proceeding. Use the MVP to replace estimates with observed results.
Illustrative arithmetic only. These inputs are not a customer result, product benchmark, or forecast. Use your own comparable baseline and observed MVP results.
Assume 24,000 eligible cases a year and 15 minutes of current preparation per case. The baseline is 6,000 preparation hours; review and exceptions must be measured separately.
If observed preparation falls by 6 minutes, the theoretical release is 2,400 hours. At 60% adoption and 75% realization, the modeled usable capacity is 1,080 hours. This does not establish a reduction in payroll or headcount.
Subtract any additional review, exception handling, training, or monitoring effort before valuing the released capacity. Include recurring platform, cloud, model, support, and validation costs over the same period.
Finance and operations should agree how capacity would be used, whether any expenditure can actually be avoided, and which quality conditions must hold. Keep strategic benefits separate from cash savings.
Evaluate a conservative, expected, and higher-adoption case. Change one driver at a time before combining scenarios, and document the evidence behind each range.
What if fewer cases qualify, uptake is slower, or the case mix becomes more complex? Use eligible volume rather than the total customer or policy population.
What if reviewer effort rises or difficult cases remain manual? Include the work outside the automated path and the cost of remediating material errors.
What if integration takes longer, model usage rises, or benefits start later? Compare costs and benefits over the same time horizon and disclose excluded costs.
Define minimum quality, maximum acceptable cost, responsible benefit owners, and review dates. A positive modeled return does not override a failed control or material unresolved risk.
This document does not send or save your entries. Print or save to PDF to retain your completed notes before closing it.