A practical comparison
Does this workflow actually need AI?
Use explicit rules when the inputs and decisions are predictable. Consider AI for interpreting varied language or documents, with a person reviewing uncertain or consequential results.
Discuss my options
| What to consider | AI-assisted workflow | Rules-based automation |
|---|---|---|
| Inputs | Varied emails, documents or natural language | Consistent fields and known formats |
| Decisions | Probabilistic suggestions that need evaluation | Explicit conditions that can be traced |
| Review | People check ambiguity and high-impact outputs | People handle exceptions and rule changes |
| Operating costs | Model usage, evaluation and monitoring | Hosting, integrations and rule maintenance |
| Good fit | Drafting or extracting information for review | Routing, calculations and repeatable checks |
A general comparison of approaches. Actual costs and capabilities depend on the tools and scope you choose.
Look at the inputs and decisions.
Write down which inputs have a predictable format and which need interpretation. Explicit conditions may cover routing and calculations even when another step needs AI.
Test ordinary cases and exceptions.
Use examples from the work to check results, review time and failure cases. Assign someone to handle uncertain outputs and changes to the rules.
Let’s make something useful
A good place to start is a conversation.
Bring one workflow, a question or the idea you keep coming back to. We’ll work out a useful next step together.
Request my callFor businesses in Toledo & Detroit Metro