How is this different from Glean / Copilot / Notion AI?

Those are search products with a chat interface bolted on. We build the 48X graph from your docs, email, meetings, and CRM, then wire it into outreach, reporting, onboarding, and internal Q&A. And we ship in 48 hours, customised to your business, instead of a generic SaaS subscription.

Do we have to migrate our data?

No. We sit on top of where it already lives — Google Drive, SharePoint, your CRM, your inbox. No migration, no data lake project, no two-year IT initiative.

How do you handle confidential or sensitive content?

It stays inside your tenancy. We never copy it out. Permissions from your source systems are inherited automatically.

What is "the 48X graph," actually?

It's the difference between a folder of PDFs and a structured database. We turn "the email Maria sent about pricing" into a fact: Maria · approved · 10% discount · for Account X · on April 12. Multiply that by every email, doc, and meeting in your business. That's the 48X graph.

How do you keep it accurate when the business changes?

New emails, docs, and meetings flow in automatically. The graph rebuilds the affected entities daily. You don't curate it; it stays current on its own.

Does outcome-based pricing apply forever?

No. The 48-hour build is paid only on outcome — that's the entry. Subsequent work (multi-workflow rollouts, ongoing partnership, advisory) uses conventional pricing: monthly retainer or fixed project fee, depending on scope. The outcome guarantee is the entry point. After the first build proves out, we operate like a normal partner.

We've been burned by AI tools that promised 40% productivity gains and delivered integration nightmares. Why is this different?

This is the right objection to ask. The Thunders 2026 CTO survey backs it: cost and integration ease beat ROI claims as the top adoption factors. Why? Vendors have been overselling for two years. We don't sell productivity numbers we can't prove. On the first call, we agree the metric: PRs merged per week, ticket cycle time, or senior-engineer hours reclaimed. We tie the milestone payment to it. Then we ship in 48 hours, so you see the integration work before serious money is spent. If the metric doesn't move, you don't pay.

How is this different from giving everyone Cursor or Copilot?

Those are autocomplete on steroids — they live inside the IDE while a human drives. We install ticket-to-PR mode: Claude Code owns the ticket from Jira to PR-ready code, while humans stay in review. 92% of teams already use AI for code generation; the differentiator now is Jira, GitHub, CI, and review integration, not the model.

What if the AI writes bad code?

It does, sometimes. That's why every PR runs through your existing CI, your branch protections, and a human reviewer. The AI's job isn't to merge code. It's to prep the PR so cleanly a senior engineer reviews and merges in five minutes — instead of writing it from scratch in three hours.

Will our team push back on this?

Senior engineers love it once they see it. The thing they hate isn't AI — it's writing the boilerplate, the tests, and the bug fixes they've done a hundred times. We free them up for the work that's actually hard.

Do you only work with Claude Code?

It's our default because it is currently the strongest model for ticket-to-PR coding runs. We also support Codex and open-source coding models for clients with specific compliance constraints. We're not religious about the tool — we're religious about the outcome.

What if our codebase is messy / legacy / uncommented?

That's normal. We index it as it is and the 48X graph links files, past PRs, decisions, and test patterns. Most of our clients have codebases nobody on the current team fully understands. Claude Code handles that better than a new hire would.

How do we measure ROI?

PRs merged per week, time-to-merge, ticket cycle time, senior engineer hours freed. We agree the metric on the first call. If the system doesn't move it, you don't pay.

Does outcome-based pricing apply forever?

No. The 48-hour build is paid only on outcome — that's the entry. Once the system is live and the metric has moved, expansion work runs on conventional pricing: a monthly engagement that covers model updates, new workflows, on-call support, and continued integration with your stack. The outcome guarantee gets you in the door. After that, normal economics.