Services
E-commerce & Online Sales
Custom Software & Apps
Company
Our company
Business process automation means software takes over the repetitive steps in a workflow instead of people doing them. In most cases it is about data that currently moves by hand from one system to another: from the inbox into the ERP, from the shop into accounting, from a spreadsheet into a quote. Automation works on those handovers, not on any single program.
This means commercial and administrative workflows, not production plants — for machine data and equipment monitoring, see our Industrial IoT service. RPA is one technique among several, and it pays off mainly where a system offers no API.
Not every workflow is worth automating. These five patterns show up in almost every project.
The same data is entered twice. An order arrives in the shop and is retyped into the ERP. Every change has to be made in two places.
Month-end close always slips. Documents are missing, allocations are unclear, someone has to chase. The same effort every month.
A case waits on one person. An approval, a price check, a reply — if they are away, the process stops.
Deadlines slip because nobody is watching them. Early-payment discount terms and delivery dates sit in a system, but nothing reminds anyone.
There is a spreadsheet nobody can replace. It sits between two systems and holds logic that is documented nowhere.
We never start from a platform. We start from a process. These three areas cover most of our automation projects.
From quote to order confirmation without retyping. Configuration, pricing and order entry run as one chain instead of across four systems.
Answer recurring enquiries without reading every message. Enquiries are classified, routed and given a draft reply. Approval stays with your team.
Capture, check, file and post documents into the ERP. Including multi-entity, cross-border and custom posting rules — the cases standard products do not cover.
There are five common routes to automating a process. None is better in principle. The difference is how well the result still runs after two years, and who maintains it then.
| Approach | Fits when | Does not fit when | Maintainability |
| Custom development (weeks–months) | The process logic is your competitive advantage | The process is standard and available off the shelf | High, if documented. You control the lifecycle |
| Integrations & APIs (days–weeks) | The systems are fine, they just don't talk to each other | A system has no API and cannot be extended | High. Needs updating at version changes |
| Low-code & workflow tools (hours–days) | The workflow is simple and should be editable in-house | Branching and exceptions dominate | Medium. Fast to build, often hard to hand over. Licence costs scale with use |
| RPA (days–weeks) | A system offers no interface and has to stay | An API exists — then RPA is more expensive and more fragile | Low. Any interface change can stop the bot |
| Standard product (hours–days) | The process is common and requirements fit the standard | You need special logic the product does not know | High while you stay in the standard. The vendor controls the lifecycle |
In most projects the answer is a combination: a standard product for the common part, a custom integration for the part that works differently at your company. If a vendor tells you which route is right before analysing the process, they don't know the process.
We work with companies across Italy, Germany, Austria and Switzerland from our base in South Tyrol. The starting point is usually the same: one workflow that takes too long.
We built Cockpit because we kept solving the same problems for clients: recognising and filing incoming invoices, reconciling payments, answering recurring enquiries, sorting the inbox. Cockpit runs inside Microsoft 365 or Google Workspace, and approval stays with your team. Available EU-hosted or on-premise.
If your process fits the standard, Cockpit is the faster and cheaper route. If it doesn't, we build it.
Automation does not start with software. We work in five steps, and after the second you know whether the project pays for itself.
We look at the workflow where it actually happens. What gets documented is how the process really runs, not how the manual describes it.
Every candidate is scored on effort, frequency and error rate. If a process does not pay for itself, we say so.
We automate one process completely rather than five halfway. The pilot runs in production and produces the numbers for everything that follows.
Further processes in the agreed order, each with handover to the department and documentation that reads without us.
Monitoring, error handling and adjustment at system changes. An automated process is not a closed project, it is something you operate.
RPA is one of several techniques within business process automation. A bot drives existing interfaces the way a person would, and it is useful when a system offers no API. Business process automation also covers API integrations, workflow engines, custom development and standard products. In practice RPA is the emergency exit, not the default route.
Yes, and often more than for large organisations, because the workflows are easier to see and decisions are faster. The calculation is the same: frequency × handling time × staff cost, against build and running costs. From a few hours of manual work per week on the same workflow, a project usually pays back within a year.
No-code holds up well as long as branching stays the exception. Once special cases become the rule, the model gets hard to follow and licence costs scale with usage. The usual path for companies starting with standard processes and later needing industry-specific workflows: no-code for the simple part, API integration for the core.
Honestly, that can only be answered after process analysis. Four things are calculable: hours saved, error costs avoided, shorter lead times and removed waiting periods. In our projects the second is almost always larger than expected, because error costs are usually recorded nowhere.
Usually yes. We regularly work with systems that have grown over years, including OMBIS, TeamSystem and Zucchetti. Without an API, the options are database access, file exchange over established standards, or RPA as a last resort. Replacing the ERP is not a prerequisite.
Workflows that happen rarely, where almost every case is different, or that need to be clarified first. An unclear process does not get better through automation — it just goes wrong faster. And if a process is about to be replaced, automating it is a wasted investment.