We help financial and professional services firms deploy leading AI platforms, embed them in everyday workflows, and keep improving the results.
One recognisable piece of work, drawn from the finance team pack we built for a New Zealand finance function running Xero. The shape repeats across the firms we work with: documents arrive, most of the handling is mechanical, and a few items need a person's judgement.
Illustrative example · Finance Team Pack
This is what "putting AI to work" means in practice: the mechanical handling done, the judgement left where it belongs, and a trail behind both. The same pattern runs through renewals, year-end workpapers, matter files and design reports.
Most firms come to us with a piece of work in mind. Some arrive with AI already running and nobody looking after it. A few have a decision to make before either.
We take one workflow, design it against how the work is really done, connect it to your documents and systems, and build it into production with the review controls and audit trail it needs. Your people end up running it, not watching a demo of it.
Workflow implementation → 02Once a workflow is live, someone has to watch it: whether the outputs are still right, what it costs to run, where it should be tightened or extended. We can be that someone, under a separate agreement, so the work does not stall at go-live.
Ongoing operations → 03If the question is still what AI means for the business, or which platform to commit to, that is a board or owner decision rather than an implementation. Founder-led advisory handles it on its own, and is entirely optional.
AI Platform Advisory →The industries we work in share a shape. The work runs on documents and judgement, and someone may ask years afterwards how a decision was reached. Pick yours to see the workflows we usually start with.
Commercial renewals prepared from the expiring schedule and claims history, submissions to market, inbox triage and FAP file completeness. Our strongest practice.
Brokers →Year-end workpapers with the source, the check and the reviewer's sign-off on the file; provisional tax, FBT and IRD correspondence. NZ and Australian versions.
Accounting →Underwriting submissions read and summarised with the gaps listed, claims files summarised, policy wordings compared, compliance evidence kept as it happens.
Insurers & MGAs →Annual review preparation and file completeness for advisers and paraplanners, with the adviser's responsibility left where the regulator puts it.
Wealth & advice →Matter chronologies and an issues-and-evidence matrix built from the file, disclosure and privilege review, contract review, for New Zealand practice.
Legal →Credit files prepared and checked for completeness, credit memo drafts and covenant monitoring. The credit officer still decides.
Lending →Design reports checked against their supporting evidence and peer review prepared, so the file behind the signature is complete before the engineer signs.
Engineering →Deliverables checked against the brief before they ship, proposal and SOW drafting, and engagement files that show who reviewed what.
Consulting & IT services →Your own ledger rather than a client's: the AP inbox, supplier statements, month-end and the management pack, on Xero, with draft as the ceiling.
Finance teams →These are examples, not a boundary. We are drawn to complex processes and firms that like doing things properly. If someone may later ask to see your working, we should talk.
Document-heavy, regulated and unforgiving of demoware. That is the work Airclerk knows from the inside, and it is why brokers are still our strongest practice.
Before Airclerk, Dan, Matt and Ed shipped more than one hundred projects together at Trineo, an early New Zealand Salesforce partner, through the SaaS wave. That record belongs to that team and that era, not to Airclerk's client list, which is newer. What carried over is the lesson: the technology is the easy part, and what makes an implementation stick is the change around it.
In our experience AI projects often change hands at go-live: the builders move on and support inherits the gaps. Ours don't. Where a firm wants ongoing support, the people who built the workflow are the ones who look after it.
Certificate 1677-I-1, issued July 2026. Security, governance and auditability are part of how we build, not a phase after it. Security and deployment details →
The platform is chosen for the firm, not for us: what you already license, where your documents live, and what the workflow needs. We implement Claude, Microsoft Copilot and ChatGPT, and the controls and record are the same whichever one runs the work. We do not resell licences.
Add our AI Process Assurance platform to keep a business-readable record of what the AI did, the evidence it used and who signed it off: the AI Workpaper. It is sold on subscription, with implementation services to configure it around your workflows, and it covers the workflows and tools connected to it.
From your side we need the person who owns the work day to day, someone from risk or security, and a sponsor. The owner matters most: the workflow gets built around how the work is really done, not how the process document says it is done.
Where AI could make the biggest difference, how that work runs today, the systems it touches and who owns it. We also work out together whether Airclerk is the right partner for it. If we are, the conversation gives us enough to quote.
One document: the outcome we are aiming for, what we deliver, what your team contributes, the fixed fee and timeline, and what acceptance looks like. Nothing starts until it is agreed on both sides.
The engagement opens with the detailed design, agreed with you before anything is built. Then we configure and connect the workflow to your documents and systems, build in the agreed review controls and audit trail, test it on real work, and prepare the people who will run it.
Handover, and the support that follows go-live, are written into the scope so you know what is covered before you sign. Ongoing operations and further workflows are a separate agreement, made when you want them rather than switched on by default.
A fixed fee in NZD plus GST, quoted in writing after the first conversation. The fee is set by the shape of the workflow: the systems it touches and the controls it needs. Platform licences and usage are paid by you to the platform provider and sit outside our fee. Handover and the support that follows go-live are written into the scope; ongoing operations are a separate agreement.
The shape of the workflow sets the timeline, and we quote it with the fee. A document-only workflow and one that crosses several systems are different builds. As a reference point, the accounting implementation, our most defined build, runs six weeks.
Most people arrive with one in mind; their own tinkering found it. If yours isn't obvious, finding it is part of the first conversation. If the question is bigger than a workflow, what AI means for the business or which platform to commit to, that is advisory rather than implementation, and it is optional.
No. We implement Claude, Microsoft Copilot and ChatGPT, and we recommend one on the first conversation based on what you already license, where your documents live and what the workflow needs. Either way the licences are yours, under your own agreement with the provider.
Then don't. We wrote up how to run the experiment on your own work first, with no pitch attached: find out for yourself. If you would rather talk it through, write to us anyway and say you are not sure where to start.
Tell us about the work. A free introductory conversation is enough to know whether we can help and what it would cost.