Choose which optional cookies we can use. You can change your mind at any time from "Cookie settings" at the foot of every page.

Illustrative scenario

A professional firm that can't find its own knowledge

  • Professional services
  • Knowledge retrieval

Overview

How we'd approach knowledge retrieval for an accountancy or consultancy practice where the answers exist but nobody can find them quickly.

The situation

The pain point Junior staff ask the same questions again and again, and senior people lose time answering them.

A 30-person accountancy practice has years of guidance, templates and email threads spread across shared drives and inboxes. Often the answer already exists somewhere nobody can find.

Diagram: guidance notes, templates in several versions and old email threads scattered across shared drives and inboxes, with the answer in there somewhere. Junior staff keep asking where the guidance is, and senior people answer the same questions every week.

Where AI could help

The opportunity is knowledge retrieval: a way to ask a plain-English question and get an answer grounded in the firm's own documents, with a link to the source. Done properly it cites where each answer came from, so people can check it.

Diagram: the guidance, templates and email threads all feed an AI that answers from the firm's own documents. Anyone in the firm asks in plain English, and every answer links to its source so people can check it.

How we'd approach it

  1. Intake. Which questions get asked most, and where the trustworthy source material lives.
  2. Opportunity scoring. We'd be upfront about document quality, because retrieval is only as good as what it's searching.
  3. Proof of concept. We'd build a working demo over a slice of the firm's real, anonymised material and let the team ask it real questions, checking the answers cite the right sources.
  4. Report. Accuracy, the risk of confident but wrong answers, how to keep it current, and the running cost.
  5. Build or handover. We build it, or hand a development-ready brief to their own team or supplier, with the guardrails spelled out.
Diagram: five steps, from intake and scoring that's upfront about document quality to a proof of concept with real questions on real material before any build, then a report on accuracy, risks, upkeep and running cost, and build or handover.

What success would look like

We'd measure how often the tool returns a correct, well-sourced answer to the firm's real questions, and the time saved compared with asking a colleague. If it can't answer reliably with citations, it isn't ready, and we'd say so plainly.

Diagram: two things measured today and in the proof of concept: correct, well-sourced answers, and time saved against asking a colleague. If it can't cite its sources, it isn't ready.

See it on your own data

Every business is different, so the proof of concept is where we find out whether this works for yours.