Show me how this actually runs.
Workflows built and delivered for clients — described in the detail the work actually has, with the account kept anonymous — client confidentiality is the default here. No live demonstration here: a demo reel proves a screen recording, not a workflow.
Every claim on this page carries its status — delivered, named, or ours.
A claim carries its status.
Nothing here is a synthetic fixture. Every number is an operating fact, read off the running workflow — what it covers, how often it runs, what it handles.
Delivered client workflow — anonymised
Built and delivered to a real client. The account stays confidential as standard.
Named client workflow
The same, with written permission.
Customer zero
Our own business on the product, run in the open.
Architecture proof
The design and controls exist and can be demonstrated.
Four weeks of chasing, or fifty ranked accounts before Monday.
Weekly commercial intelligence for a battery lifecycle and servicing business — an opportunity that took two to six people, ten sources and two to four weeks now runs in minutes, and lands with the proposal already drafted.
An opportunity started as a signal somewhere — a project announcement, a permit, an ownership change, an OEM notice. Finding it, confirming it was still current, checking internal records, asking the person who knew, and turning it into something commercially actionable took two to six people across ten sources, and two to four weeks.
The same journey, in minutes. One ranked radar on published weights, a change board showing what moved, and a territory summary in the team’s inbox before Monday starts — with proposals drafted per project, scope and customer. A named account manager reviews every one before it leaves.
Priority radar
Top 50 accounts, ranked on published weights.
Change board
New, improving, declining, needs action.
Geographic view
Every project above 10 MW, mapped.
Safety map
Incidents and recalls, sourced.
Weekly summary
Monday 06:00, emailed by territory.
Proposal generator
Project, scope and customer specific.
Commercial decisions, technical commitments and anything customer-facing. A named account manager releases every proposal.
Weekly, with the run parking for review before anything leaves the business.
The scoring weights, the source hierarchy and the service-trigger logic — the judgement about which asset events actually signal a service need. It lived in one strategist’s head; it is now what the next cycle runs on, and what a disagreement corrects.
Every customer sees every well — and stops asking what it means.
Customer-facing tracer diagnostics for a well completions provider — a deliverable that took two to four people and one to two weeks to assemble is now a dashboard the customer drives, with the report generated on one click.
A spreadsheet per project, assembled by two to four people across two to four systems over one to two weeks. Then the larger cost arrived: every question about a stage, a well-to-well comparison or an offset response came back to the team to explain again.
A dashboard per customer covering every well, pad and project, reached by login or direct link. The customer explores stages, compares wells across pads, counties and basins, moves the offset threshold and watches it recalculate — and generates the report themselves.
Interval flow
Stage-level, interpretation on selection.
Offset communication
Adjustable threshold, live recalculation.
Time progression
Stage-to-stage variation over time.
Change heat map
Percentage and absolute, across the pad.
Well comparison
Stacked, individual, full table.
One-click report
PDF, email or CSV — all wells or one.
The provider sets the interpretation threshold, or leaves it adjustable for the operator. How aggressive to be stays a human decision.
Per job — the dashboard is generated from the deliverable data and scoped to that customer’s own wells.
The interpretation method itself. One analyst’s approach became the structure every subsequent well runs through — including views the original spreadsheet never had — and the accumulated project data became searchable across jobs instead of closing with each one.
When the warranty clock starts, the evidence room is already open.
Event evidence room for a battery storage operator — the claim-defence trail assembled by the system, not by hand under deadline pressure.
Events, alarms, maintenance history, warranty terms, obligations and reporting deadlines live in separate systems. Someone reconstructs the trail each time, and the missing piece is usually found after the deadline.
One room holds the event, its source records, the obligations attached, the named owner and the recommended follow-up — with anything missing stated as missing rather than quietly absent.
Event context
Alarm, maintenance and warranty records.
Source trail
Every claim bound to its record.
Named gaps
Evidence that should exist and does not.
Obligations
Contract and reporting duties, attached.
Decision packet
Triage recommendation, reasoning shown.
Follow-up
Corrective actions routed after approval.
The warranty position, any communication with the OEM, and the decision to escalate. The run parks for a named approver before anything leaves the business.
Event-driven, with reporting deadlines tracked against the obligations already attached to the event.
The fault-to-corrective trail. A repeat event of the same class starts from the prior diagnosis, evidence set and decision — instead of a blank page and a search.
The company that built it runs on it.
Before Morpheus was sold to anyone, it ran the company that built it — lifecycle, product feedback, engineering handoff, revenue, support, enterprise answers, market intelligence and follow-through.
Eight operating domains coordinated by hand across twenty-one systems — with the follow-through living in people’s heads and inboxes.
The same eight domains carried on the layer, the twenty-one systems unchanged underneath, and ten automations on a recurring schedule — the tightest loop running every four hours.
Everything customer-facing, everything involving money, and every externally visible action — behind a pre-flight check.
Continuous — the deployment we run hardest, end to end, in the open.
The playbooks, trackers and rules that now shape every client engagement. A vendor who will not run their own product on their own business is telling you something.
The full customer-zero account — domains, systems, schedule and claim boundary →
Half the price. Six times the revenue. The team saw more clients, not fewer.
The research service behind HtAG Analytics, rebuilt on Morpheus — a $750 brief now sells for $350, revenue runs six times higher, and the founder is no longer the bottleneck.
A brief meant several days of the founder’s work: roughly 150 indicators cross-referenced by hand, then the argued document. Three to five shipped a week at $750 each — roughly $150,000 a year, against a structural ceiling of $195,000.
The client’s email triggers the run and the codified methodology executes end to end, to a draft a researcher reviews and releases. Fifty briefs a week at $350 — a run rate near $1M — with measured capacity for fifty a day.
The release — and the explanation. Every walkthrough, coaching session and client conversation. The human numbers went up.
Triggered by the request itself — work starts when demand does. Versioned, dry-run-safe.
A decade of founder judgement, its contradictions resolved — now an asset of the business rather than an attribute of a person.
The research that finds the edge now runs itself — the data team builds instead.
The correlation-hunting behind HtAG’s proprietary metrics — RCS™, GSP, GPD — industrialised into a governed daily loop, with publication behind an operator gate.
New metrics began as stolen hours: the data team scanning markets, chasing correlations between events and data, between metric and metric — scattered across chats and files, weak ideas indistinguishable from validated ones.
A daily orchestrator runs whichever cadence is due — weekly signal scan, fortnightly QA, monthly validation against live HtAG data, quarterly synthesis — into one evidence store. Only the top tier may be spoken aloud.
Publication, skill changes and product launches — every promotion out of the loop is an operator’s decision.
Daily — the router runs what is due and heartbeats when nothing is. It never invents findings on a quiet day.
The pipeline itself: every validated finding is a candidate metric, skill or product — the first product seed is already in the queue.
Compliance stopped being something you reconstruct afterwards.
Continuous control assurance for an APRA-regulated Australian bank — regulatory intelligence and control testing running as one governed loop, against CPS 230, CPS 234, CPS 220, FAR and SOCI.
Three lines of defence, all of them looking backwards. Regulatory intelligence aggregated ad hoc and expensively; obligations distilled by hand; control effectiveness asserted in documents and demonstrated at review. APRA’s letter to industry says reactive is no longer sufficient for a bank of this significance.
Two instances and one seam. One computes what must be true — a daily regulator sweep distilled into an obligation register, approved entry by entry. The other computes what is true — every control tested at its own frequency, with the evidence captured as it runs. The GRC system of record is unchanged.
Regulatory watch
Daily sweep, weekly briefing, monthly horizon.
Obligation register
Source clause, owner, effective date, review-by.
Control library
Owner, frequency, timing, evidence spec.
Control testing
At the control’s cadence — the signal is the evidence.
Line 2 assurance
Monthly challenge pack, opinion per sample.
Accountability view
Per accountable person, current to the last run.
Whether an obligation applies, which controls answer it, and release of anything regulator-bound. Notification drafts arrive with the clock attached and a hard approval gate in front.
Daily sweep, weekly control health, monthly assurance sampling, quarterly board pack — each control on its own legislated frequency.
The obligation register as a maintained artifact rather than an ageing document; the control anatomy, carried identically so a test schedule can be minted from it; and the distillation method, which is per-standard — so promoting a watch-only standard is a watchlist edit and one run, not a redesign.
What we will not publish.
Because publishing it would make everything else here worth less.
Unbaselined numbers
A figure without a baseline, a timeframe and a sample is marketing, not measurement. Every number here is an operating fact.
Named accounts
Confidentiality is the default. A name appears only where the client chose to put it there.
Live demonstrations
They prove a recording, not a workflow. No comparable vendor publishes one.