AI discovery platform for consulting firms

Deliver every engagement on discovery you can defend.

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.

$500 per active project Unlimited users Pause between engagements Participants always free
Every line links to the SME interview, page or timestamp behind it Source-linked
  • A missed requirementbecomes a scope dispute
  • A missed process stepbecomes a failed go-live
  • A missed exceptionbecomes a change order you eat
  • A missed SMEbecomes the reason adoption stalls

ClearWork's job is to make sure none of those are found in UAT.

The problem

You're writing requirements on what twelve people thought to mention.

Two weeks with the client's people, and the calendar decides who you hear from. Here's a client process, drawn both ways.

What the workshop gave you

Five steps. Everyone agreed.

Requisition raised Approved & PO issued Goods received Invoice matched Payment released

The version that gets written into your requirements — and wrong in five places.

What the client actually runs

The same process, with what nobody thought to mention.

3-way match fails → rework Requisition raised Goods received Invoice matched Payment released APPROVAL — TWO ROUTES UK entity in the ERP US entity email to Finance One-off vendors skip the req raised retrospectively after delivery Variation — two entities, two routes Neither is documented. Nobody has compared them. Over £15k → CFO, not the delegated authority in the policy Blocked invoices cleared by email no record in the system

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.

Source-linked

When the client says that's not what we agreed.

Scope disputes aren't won by having better notes. They're won by showing, in the room, exactly where the requirement came from.

Requirements — Purchase to Pay CLIENT ENGAGEMENT · v4 · 14 SOURCES
REQ-041 Requisition approval above £15,000 must route to the CFO, not the delegated authority named in the current procurement policy.
REQ-042 Goods receipt must be recorded before invoice matching in all entities.
REQ-043 The US entity approves outside the ERP by email. Either the process moves in, or the integration must accept an external approval record.
REQ-044 Three-way match tolerance is configurable per vendor category.
REQ-045 One-off vendors currently bypass requisition entirely — POs are raised retrospectively after delivery.
AP Manager interview · 22:14 Procurement policy v6 · p.12 Kickoff recording · 41:07

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.

A day in the life

Two consulting jobs. One platform.

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.

Operating model assessment 12 stakeholders 4 functional areas Six-week diagnostic
What's at stake

The nuance that turns a credible recommendation into one a partner can poke holes in.

01

Everything you already have goes in

Scope docs, prior strategy decks nobody has read in eighteen months, kickoff recordings, existing SOPs.

Client materials imported into a ClearWork engagement
02

Async interviews extend your reach

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.

Structured interview with a screen-recording walkthrough as the stakeholder sees it
03

Conflicts surface before the readout

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

Review of proposed findings before they enter the client record
04

Generate the diagnosis from validated truth

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.

Generated executive summary grounded in the validated client record
12
stakeholders captured
4
functional areas mapped
1
validated client record
0
unsourced findings in the readout
ERP implementation 18 process areas 4 entities Five-week discovery
What's at stake

A build that starts on shallow discovery — and scope misses that surface in UAT.

01

Load the client's existing material

Process documentation, policy manuals, legacy system exports, workshop notes. ClearWork reads all of it and drafts the first version of the record.

Client documentation imported for an ERP implementation engagement
02

Process owners contribute in parallel

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.

An async interview with a process owner, conducted by voice or chat
03

Gaps exposed before design assumptions form

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

Discovery plan showing gaps and assigned interviews across process areas
04

Build-ready requirements, sourced

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.

Generated user stories with the source behind each one
18
process areas mapped
4
entities captured
0
requirements without a source
1
record the next phase inherits
Your clients' data

Every engagement is sealed.

Client isolation, access control, and where your client's data actually goes.

Complete separation between clients

No leakage, no cross-project retrieval, no shared context. Each engagement behaves like its own system — because to your client, it is.

You decide what the client sees

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.

No AI training on client data

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
Why not just use Claude or ChatGPT?

Every other tool waits for someone to write it down.

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.

A chat threadPassive
Summarise the purchase-to-pay process from these client documents.
Purchase-to-pay runs in five steps: requisition raised, approved and PO issued, goods received…
New chat · none of this persists
A good answer about the documents you were given. It can't know what isn't in them, it answers differently next time, and there's nothing to hand to the next consultant on the engagement.
A validated client recordActive
ClearWork client knowledge base showing people, roles, processes, systems and risks with counts, plus tracked conflicts, unknowns and variations
Typed entities, live counts, and conflicts, unknowns and variations tracked separately — a client record you can navigate, correct, defend in a readout, and hand to the implementation team.

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.

The value you deliver

"Where can I continue to deliver value?"

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.

TodaySame fee
Discovery
Synthesis
Rec.
With ClearWorkSame fee
Disc.
Synth.
Recommendation
Discovery Synthesis Recommendation

Same fee. More of it spent on the part they can't get anywhere else.

On the proposal

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.

On the hours

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.

On what you're selling

Your client cannot buy your judgment from anyone else. They can buy note-taking from a $20 chat subscription.

Margin math

Your numbers, your assumptions.

At $500 per active project — roughly one billable hour a month — most firms bake it straight into the engagement fee.

Engagement inputs

Estimated annual impact

336
discovery hours returned per year
$50,400
recovered capacity at your blended rate
$12,000
ClearWork cost at $500 per active project month

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.

Deliverables

Every work product, from one engagement.

Not blank templates to fill in — populated deliverables drafted from your real client materials, every line linked to the source it came from.

Generated process flow diagram with swimlanes

Process maps & swimlanes

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

Generated user stories with source provenance

Requirements, BRDs, RTMs & user stories

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
Generated standard operating procedure

SOPs & work instructions

Procedure documents drafted from how the work is actually done, not from a template you fill in.

Generated executive summary

Roadmaps & executive briefs

Current-state reads, gap analyses and client-ready narratives grounded in the validated record.

Engagement fit

Built for every kind of engagement.

Because they all start with the same truth: if you don't understand the process, you don't understand the requirements.

Process improvement

Capture reality, find bottlenecks, standardise across teams.

ERP / CRM implementation

Workflows, exceptions and requirements before the build phase.

Technology selection

Fit-gap grounded in real operations, not vendor feature lists.

AI / agent deployment

Define safe scope and human handoffs before automating anything.

Operating model redesign

Clarify ownership, decisions and cross-team responsibilities.

Shared services

Standardise processes across teams, regions and entities.

Post-merger integration

Align processes, cut duplication, ramp the combined org.

Compliance & controls

Capture approval points, evidence trails and policy adherence.

Questions

For consulting teams, answered.

How is this different from just using Claude or ChatGPT?

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.

How do you know the extraction was right in the first place?

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.

Can clients see ClearWork, or is it consultant-only?

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.

How do client SMEs take part without scheduling meetings?

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.

What happens when the engagement ends?

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.

Can we standardise our firm's discovery approach?

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.

Can we get the outputs into the tools we already use?

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.

Bring your own materials

Bring a live engagement. We'll build the record from your client's real materials.

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.

Start free — 14 days Book a 30-minute call
$500 per active project · Unlimited users · Founder-led support