THONIS AI-AUGMENTED SOLUTIONS · CONNECTED BY DESIGN

Make your existing systems work better together.

Your team spends too much time finding information, copying it between tools and chasing decisions. THONIS helps connect that work across the systems they already use, with AI assistance where it can make a useful difference.

Power Automate consulting, workflow repair and Microsoft 365 handoffs. Start with the task your team needs to finish.

Start with a free written fit review. Describe the work and deadline; we will suggest a next step. A call is optional. Paid work starts only after agreement on scope, fee and acceptance criteria.

THONIS / Connected by design

One change.
See what follows.

Synthetic example: requirement R-17, draft revision 2, changes endurance from 10 to 14 hours. The energy budget and test plan need impact review. The engineering lead has not recorded a decision. No approval or execution has occurred.

  1. 01

    A requirement changes.

    The endurance target moves from 10 to 14 hours. The source is clear. What else needs attention?

  2. 02

    Find what needs a second look.

    Trace the draft change to the energy budget and test plan. Confirm the impact before changing either record.

  3. 03

    Make the next decision clear.

    Give the engineering lead the changed source, affected records and open questions. The decision still belongs to a person.

Illustrative workflow. Synthetic records; no customer result or automated approval.

Start at the point your team needs help.

If the scope is clear, we can quote implementation directly. If it needs investigation, we first scope a paid assessment. You receive the deliverables, fee, timing and review process before deciding.

01

Find the bottleneck

Map one workflow, its owners and source records. Identify the work worth automating, what should stay manual, and how you will judge the result.

Paid assessment deliverable: a prioritized plan and a scoped implementation proposal you can act on.
02

Implement one useful change

Connect intake, document comparison, drafting or routing to the actual work. Test the exceptions and keep consequential authority with named people.

A scoped implementation, documented limits and an agreed acceptance test.
03

Build the workspace the job needs

When the complete workflow needs a dedicated place to work, design a tailored workspace for source information, review, decisions and handoffs.

A separately scoped solution with clear ownership, support and exit terms.

A flow that fails. An approval someone keeps chasing.

These fictional examples show how one task becomes a reviewable piece of paid work. The systems are the customer's tools; access, connectors, licensing and the delivery plan are confirmed during scoping.

POWER AUTOMATE REPAIR

Fix a flow that creates duplicate work.

Starting problem
A request should create one SharePoint record and route it to its owner. A retry creates a second record, leaving the team to reconcile both.
Proposed deliverable
Reproduce the failure with approved test inputs, correct the duplicate-handling and failure path, and document the changed flow and recovery steps.
Acceptance checks to agree
A valid request reaches the right owner once. Repeated input does not duplicate the business action. Missing data and a failed handoff produce a visible exception and a safe recovery path.
DOCUMENT REVIEW AND APPROVAL

Move a request from inbox to an accountable decision.

Starting problem
A team copies details from documents into Excel and chases approvals in email or Teams. Missing facts and ownership are difficult to track.
Proposed deliverable
Prepare a review draft linked to the approved source, flag missing facts, and route the exact version to a named reviewer. Use AI extraction or drafting only where the input and review process support it.
Acceptance checks to agree
The reviewer can check each material value against its source. An incomplete record remains unresolved. Rejection and correction work, and release requires the agreed approval of the current version.

A strong starting case is operational, attributable, and safe to scope.

We do not need sensitive evidence in the first conversation. We do need enough context to identify the workflow, authority, constraints, and result.

STRONG FIT
  • A recurring workflow with identifiable users and an accountable owner
  • Important work split across systems, documents, messages, and manual handoffs
  • A result that must be faster without becoming less defensible
  • Evidence, approvals, or historical context that must survive automation
  • A willingness to define security, data, legal, and deployment constraints early
NOT THE ENGAGEMENT
  • A generic chatbot with no bounded operational job
  • Unattended authority over consequential decisions or actions
  • A rip-and-replace mandate before existing systems and dependencies are understood
  • Automation built from sensitive material before lawful handling is established
  • A request to imply certification, conformance, integration, or outcomes without evidence

Security and trust are designed before connection. We preserve authoritative systems and named human authority. Identity, least privilege, data minimization, tenant and environment boundaries, logging, retention, model and vendor constraints, fail-closed behavior, human approval, testing, and rollback are scoped to the use case. Claims remain bounded to implemented and verified behavior.

Before you scope the work.

Can you repair an existing Power Automate flow?

Yes. Start with the expected result, what actually happens, the tools involved and the deadline. Once there is an approved way to inspect the flow and reproduce the problem, we can agree a repair scope. If the cause or dependencies are unclear, we first scope the investigation.

Do we need to replace our Microsoft tools?

No replacement is assumed. We scope around the tools and records you already use. Your tenant policies, permissions, connector availability and licenses determine which connection is appropriate. Any additional platform cost is identified before you agree to the work.

Does every workflow need AI?

No. A deterministic rule or an ordinary automation may be sufficient. AI can help with interpretation, comparison or drafting when the task needs it. We define how uncertain output is reviewed and who authorizes consequential actions before using it.

What do we receive, and how do we accept it?

The agreed scope identifies the changed workflow, documented configuration and limits, test cases, exception handling and handoff. You and the accountable owner agree the expected results before implementation. Passing a test, authorizing deployment and accepting the delivered work are separate decisions.

What should we include in the first message?

Describe one task, its trigger and intended result, the current failure or manual step, systems involved, owner and deadline. State whether you need a repair, a new workflow or help finding the bottleneck. Keep credentials, customer records and sensitive files out of the inquiry; we can define an approved intake path after fit is established.

What is your team still chasing by hand?

Tell us what needs to be finished, where it gets stuck and when it matters. Workflow facts are enough for the first conversation.

Describe your workflow