What teams say
after working with us
Unedited perspectives from organisations who started with a question and came away with a clearer picture.
Back to Home3+
Years in Practice
60+
Engagements Completed
4.7
Average Client Rating
SG
PDPA Compliant
In their own words
Tan Cheng Hui
Operations Director, Raffles Place
"We came in expecting to hear which AI platform we should be using. Instead, the observation visit produced a note that helped us understand what was actually slow in our document review process — and it turned out only one part of it was a good candidate for AI. That kind of clarity was worth more than any software recommendation."
April 2025 · Single Frame Engagement
Rohit Nair
Managing Partner, Tanjong Pagar
"The Triptych Build took about eight weeks from the initial specification meeting to handover. Our team was sceptical at the start — they'd seen technology projects come and go — but the four-week trial period let them form their own view. The handover document was genuinely useful for the two staff members who manage the workflow now."
March 2025 · Triptych Build
Michelle Lim
Finance Manager, CBD
"I appreciated the pacing of the Gallery Programme. Fortnightly sessions meant our team could actually absorb what was being introduced. By the third month, our staff were asking questions that I wouldn't have expected them to be asking so early. The quarterly reviews also caught one workflow that needed adjusting before it became a problem."
April 2025 · Gallery Programme
Kavya Suresh
COO, Orchard Road
"The observation visit was unexpectedly useful on its own. The note we received described our incoming correspondence process in a way that highlighted two bottlenecks we'd normalised. We didn't proceed to a build engagement immediately — we addressed one of those bottlenecks first with existing tools. That felt like the right advice."
February 2025 · Single Frame Engagement
Bernard Loh
General Manager, Marina Bay
"We're now in our sixth month of the Gallery Programme. The closing report from the first quarter was detailed and candid — it named one workflow that had underperformed during the trial and recommended retiring it. That honesty is not something I've encountered in other technology engagements."
April 2025 · Gallery Programme
Priya Yap
Head of Admin, Novena
"The written specification for our Triptych Build was reviewed over two sessions before any coding started. I found that process genuinely calming — I could see exactly what was being built and ask questions before it existed. The handover section on limitations was also something I shared directly with the team who use it."
March 2025 · Triptych Build
Engagement journeys in detail
Case Study — Professional Services Firm, Tanjong Pagar
The challenge
A 12-person advisory firm was spending roughly four hours per week on routine email drafting and client update correspondence. The volume was manageable but the cognitive load was disproportionate to the task's complexity.
The engagement
Following a Single Frame observation, a Triptych Build was scoped for a draft-reply assistant. The specification limited the tool's scope to two correspondence categories — weekly updates and standard enquiry responses. The four-week trial used two staff members before broader rollout.
What followed
Time spent on routine correspondence dropped by approximately 40% across those two categories. The handover document was used to onboard a new staff member three months later without our involvement.
"The limitation section saved us from misusing it in a situation it wasn't built for." — Operations Director
Case Study — Distribution Business, Jurong
The challenge
A distribution operation was receiving structured order confirmations from multiple suppliers in varying formats. Staff were manually extracting key fields from each — a repetitive process taking six to eight hours weekly across two team members.
The engagement
A Single Frame visit led to a Triptych Build for a structured-extraction workflow targeting the three highest-volume supplier formats. The specification explicitly excluded formats that varied too unpredictably for reliable extraction.
What followed
The workflow handles the three target formats with a staff review step at output. Manual extraction time for those formats dropped from six to under ninety minutes weekly. The remaining formats are still handled manually, as the specification intended.
"The scope limitation in the specification was the right call." — Logistics Manager
Case Study — Independent School, Buona Vista
The challenge
A small independent school's administrative team was spending significant time answering recurring parent queries — many of which could be addressed from the school's existing policy and procedure documentation.
The engagement
Following observation, a Triptych Build was scoped for an internal Q&A assistant drawing on the school's own documentation. The specification defined clearly which documents were in scope and included a required human review step before any response left the team.
What followed
The assistant now handles initial drafting of responses to approximately 60% of recurring query types. The review step catches the occasional misread. Staff report the tool saves roughly two hours of lookup time weekly and has not produced a response that required apology to a parent.
"The review step wasn't optional — it was the point." — School Administrator
Speak with us directly
Telephone
+65 8125 7493Address
5 Shenton Way, #17-12
Singapore 068808
Office Hours
Mon – Fri: 9:00 am – 6:00 pm SGT
Start with a conversation
The experiences above began with a short initial discussion. If you're curious about how AI might — or might not — fit your team's work, that conversation is a sensible starting point.
Get in Touch