We build the complex systems an operation runs on — on top of the ERP, the industry systems, and the spreadsheet half of it actually runs on. Not instead of them.
Reading the document was the part that got solved. What is left is turning each line into a record in the system that owns it, and that is where the hours go.
Software built around one company's process, and run in production afterwards. Not a product you configure, and not a project that ends at handover.
They do the work — Reading orders, checking documents, pricing deals, matching parts against a catalogue — done by software, with a person deciding where it matters.
They fit what you run — We connect to the ERP and industry systems already in place. Replacing them is almost never the right project.
They can be explained — Every result carries what it was based on. When someone asks a year later why a decision went that way, there is an answer.
They stay yours — Repository, documentation, configurations, prompts. Nothing is locked to us, and nothing to a model vendor.
It arrives however the sender felt like sending it
Email, PDF, a spreadsheet, an EDI message, an export from someone's portal. Nobody is going to change their format for you, so the system reads all of them.
A document becomes lines you can act on
Line items, quantities, terms, parts — matched against your catalogue and your master data, not against a generic dictionary.
order 4471-B · received 14:06
The system does what it can do reliably
And it does only that. Every result carries the source it came from, so a person can check it in seconds rather than redo it.
"Same as our last one" their order in January
four previous orders, all the same specification · confirmed
What it isn't sure about goes to a person, not to a folder
With the question already formed and routed to whoever can actually answer it. Once answered, it becomes a rule — the same case doesn't come back.
Their price is 4% above the agreed contract price.
Into the system that owns the record
Your ERP, unchanged. We connect to it; we don't replace it.
order 4471-B · line 3 · 250 units · 14 March · confirmed 14:31
A year later, someone will ask why
What was decided, on what basis, under which version of the rules, and who could have overruled it.
14:06 RECEIVED IN email FROM purchasing
14:06 ASKED OF account manager ABOUT price above contract
14:31 ANSWERED BY account manager AS approved once
14:31 WRITTEN TO your ERP AS line 3 of 9
One order line, mostly unstated
Industrial distribution
An order arrives as a line of text, and the part it means has eight parameters.
Matches by specification rather than part number — tolerances, materials, classes, cross-references.
Specification and standards matching, proven on real catalogues.
One deal, priced
Physical commodity trading
The economics of a deal lived in one trader's spreadsheet, and in his head.
Prices a cargo across freight, transshipment, duties and FX in seconds, and shows every line the number came from. When the margin goes negative it says so.
Closed testing on live deals at partner desks. Ten signed LOIs.
One question, answered
Maritime fleet operations
The same certificate exists in four places and none of them is authoritative.
Agents that reach a verdict and cite the passage it rests on — over the satellite link the ship already has.
Three vessels in installation.
One passenger, twice
Aviation
The most valuable hour in the terminal is the one nobody controls.
A passenger layer on the airport's own domain. No app, no login, no personal data at all.
Twelve-week terminal pilot scoped. First engagement at contract stage.
Most of what people call automation, low-code already does — and if that is your case, buy one. A freelancer can build it too, once. What neither carries is the part afterwards: escalation rules for what the software must not decide alone, a record of what every result was based on, and a fixed set of known answers that runs against every change so drift shows up before a customer does. Two questions decide which you need: can the rule be drawn, and what does a wrong answer cost.
No. We connect to it as it is configured today, and we write back into it. Replacing an ERP is almost never the right project, and a plan that quietly assumes you will is a plan that fails in month four.
It stops before it commits and asks. The item goes to a named person as a formed question, with the source attached and a clock on it — not to a folder. Once it is answered, the answer becomes a rule, and the same case does not come back.
You do. Repository, documentation, configurations, prompts and the set of known answers it is tested against. Nothing is locked to us and nothing to a model vendor. We keep running it because that is usually the cheaper arrangement, not because leaving is hard.
Bring two or three of your own documents to the first call and watch them run. Four systems in four industries are written up in full here, each with what it still needs in order to work. After that there is a paid review with a fixed length and a named list of what you get.
A first call is forty-five minutes. A paid review is a fixed number of weeks, agreed before it starts. A first system running on real work is months rather than weeks — and the part of it that starts earning arrives well before the last part is finished.
Every package is published with a number and a duration beside it, on one page. The entry point is a five-order teardown over 3 days; a paid review of one flow is a week. Both come off the price of the project. The packages are ways to start, not the whole menu. The price of a system is quoted once we have seen the full scope, and the published numbers are what that conversation starts from.
45 minutes. Send two or three of your real documents beforehand and we'll run them while you watch. You leave with a proposal, not a presentation.
Or hello@logicllab.com, or +36 20 223 2328, or WhatsApp on the same number.
