You run the engagement. ClearWork runs the AI interviews that reach the stakeholders who'd never make your workshop, then generates the process maps, requirements, RTMs and SOPs — every line traced to its source.
ClearWork's job is to make sure none of those are found in UAT.
Two weeks with the client's people, and the calendar decides who you hear from. Here's a client process, drawn both ways.
The version that gets written into your requirements — and wrong in five places.
Every dotted line is real, load-bearing, and lives only in someone's head.
Nobody withheld any of this. It just never came up.
The AP clerk who clears blocked invoices by email does it so routinely they don't register it as an exception. The person who knows the real approval threshold wasn't in the workshop. And everyone describes the process as designed, because that's the version that sounds correct in front of their manager. You find out in UAT — or when the client says you told me this during the sales cycle and you have nothing to point at.
Scope disputes aren't won by having better notes. They're won by showing, in the room, exactly where the requirement came from.
You click the line. It came from their AP Manager, on the fourth, at 22:14 — and here's the recording. The conversation stops being about whose memory is better. Every deliverable you hand over is an evidence file.
Whether you're advising the client on what to do or implementing it for them, ClearWork shapes around the engagement — not the other way around.
The nuance that turns a credible recommendation into one a partner can poke holes in.
Scope docs, prior strategy decks nobody has read in eighteen months, kickoff recordings, existing SOPs.

You still lead the live sessions. Interview links go to all twelve stakeholders — including the ones who'd never make the workshop — answered on their own time.

Where two stakeholders disagree, both views are shown with their sources. Where a step appears three ways, all three are surfaced — not averaged.

Current-state assessment, gap analysis and executive presentation from one dataset. When the CFO challenges a finding, you click the line and show the source.

A build that starts on shallow discovery — and scope misses that surface in UAT.
Process documentation, policy manuals, legacy system exports, workshop notes. ClearWork reads all of it and drafts the first version of the record.

Across all four entities at once. SMEs explain exceptions, answer follow-ups, or share their screen for a day-in-the-life walkthrough — by voice or chat.

Missing process owners, conflicting procedures, untested SOPs, ambiguous requirements. You approve follow-ups before a gap becomes a design assumption.

Requirements docs, as-is process maps, fit-gap analysis, SOPs and user stories from one dataset — exported in standard formats and ready to move into your delivery tooling. Build starts on evidence.

Client isolation, access control, and where your client's data actually goes.
No leakage, no cross-project retrieval, no shared context. Each engagement behaves like its own system — because to your client, it is.
Run it as a consultant-only workspace and present finished deliverables. Or bring named client stakeholders in with role-scoped access — interview participation, read-only review, or full collaboration.
Client documents, interviews, transcripts and recordings are never used to train a model. Data sent to AI providers is contractually excluded from training.
"It's like its own client."
Independent transformation consultant · ex-Gartner, ex-SAP
Point an LLM at the client's document set and you get a very good summary of the client's document set. It can't reach the workaround nobody wrote down, the approval threshold that isn't in the policy, or the entity doing it differently. Someone has to go and ask.
The question isn't whether an AI could draft this.
It's who maintains it in week six.
Correct something in ClearWork and it becomes a fact the system honours for the rest of the engagement. Every deliverable built on it re-surfaces for review.
They were never paying you to interview twelve people.
They were paying you to know what to do with what those twelve people said. Discovery was the tax you charged for the real work — weeks of calendar wrangling, transcription and synthesis the client experienced as an invoice and a delay.
Take the tax off the bill and you win more proposals, because you can walk into a pitch with a real read on their operation instead of a promise to go find one. And you spend the engagement on the recommendation instead of the notes.
Same fee. More of it spent on the part they can't get anywhere else.
Don't hand over the full readout before the contract. Hand over the shape of it: this is what three documents and six recordings produced — imagine the full engagement. The teaser wins the work.
If your fee is defensible only because discovery is slow, it was already fragile. Outcome-priced work gets more profitable when discovery gets faster, not less.
Your client cannot buy your judgment from anyone else. They can buy note-taking from a $20 chat subscription.
At $500 per active project — roughly one billable hour a month — most firms bake it straight into the engagement fee.
We haven't published a benchmark because we don't have enough completed engagements to publish one honestly yet. The slider starts at a conservative 35% — move it to whatever you believe.
Not blank templates to fill in — populated deliverables drafted from your real client materials, every line linked to the source it came from.

Role-based flows with handoffs, decision points and the exception paths that only surfaced in interviews.

Functional and non-functional requirements, traceability matrices, epics and acceptance criteria — exported in standard formats your delivery team can work from.
Every line source-linked
Procedure documents drafted from how the work is actually done, not from a template you fill in.

Current-state reads, gap analyses and client-ready narratives grounded in the validated record.
Because they all start with the same truth: if you don't understand the process, you don't understand the requirements.
Capture reality, find bottlenecks, standardise across teams.
Workflows, exceptions and requirements before the build phase.
Fit-gap grounded in real operations, not vendor feature lists.
Define safe scope and human handoffs before automating anything.
Clarify ownership, decisions and cross-team responsibilities.
Standardise processes across teams, regions and entities.
Align processes, cut duplication, ramp the combined org.
Capture approval points, evidence trails and policy adherence.
A good model can draft a process map from documents you paste into it. That was never the hard part.
Two things are. An LLM can only work with what someone already wrote down — it can't identify that the US entity approves outside the ERP and then go ask the AP manager about it. And a chat thread doesn't persist: ask twice, get two different answers; correct it, and the correction survives until the context window forgets.
Correct something in ClearWork and it becomes a fact the system honours for the rest of the engagement — navigable, reviewable, and handed to whoever picks up the next phase.
Fair question, and a different one from traceability. Traceability tells you where a line came from — not that the system read the document correctly.
So the record shows its work. Every claim carries what it pulled and how confident it is. Ambiguity is flagged rather than resolved quietly. Where two sources disagree, both are surfaced with their sources rather than one being silently chosen. Then a person on your team confirms it before it enters the record. The gate is the answer, not the citation.
Both. Many teams run it as a consultant-only workspace and present finished deliverables. Others bring named client stakeholders in with role-scoped access — interview participation only, read-only review of the knowledge base, or full collaboration. You decide per person.
You send a secure link by email and they respond on their own time. They can talk to a conversational voice agent, answer guided questions by typing, record their screen and narrate a day-in-the-life walkthrough, or attach files and context.
Whether your client's culture takes to async interviews varies a lot. Some use them constantly; others upload their own transcripts and never touch them. Both produce the same record.
Billing is per active project, so you stop paying at the end of the current cycle. Archive the project and the record stays intact — reactivate it if the client comes back for a phase two, and everything is where you left it.
Yes. ClearWork gives you a repeatable discovery workflow and consistent deliverable formats across engagement types and teams. Unlimited users are included per project, so the whole engagement team works in the same place at no extra cost.
Documents export to Word and PDF. Diagrams export to Visio and draw.io. Requirements, epics, user stories and acceptance criteria come out in standard structured formats your team can move into whatever tracker or delivery tool you run.
To be straight with you: we don't have native two-way integrations with delivery tools yet. Everything comes out clean and structured — but it's an export, not a live sync.
Scope docs, a kickoff recording, a couple of SOPs. You'll see the process maps, requirements and gaps it produces — not a canned demo on invented data.
Fourteen days, full access, no card required. Tell us where to set you up.
No credit card required. By continuing you agree to our terms