Send us a batch. Get it back finished.
20–50 real cases from one queue that is standing still. Three working days later you get them back completed — every fact with its source, ready for your named approver — plus a two-to-four minute recording of the whole path, from incoming case to finished result in its destination. No fee, no notice period, nothing to install.
Four answers. That is the whole entry.
What pays for this work today?
Usually an open post. But a post that was cut, someone who left and was never replaced, a supplier or BPO invoice, or overtime all count — the budget is already allocated and the work is not getting done. That is the situation we are built for.
Which queue is standing because of it?
One queue, not a department. A repeating incoming unit, a deadline that bites, and a named owner. If you can describe it in one sentence, we can work it.
Who would approve the finished cases?
We ask for the role, not the name — that person has not been told about us yet, and their name does not belong in our systems before they have been. What matters is that they exist and that you know who it is.
Can you export 20–50 real cases?
Your real cases, not a presentation. "Yes, once IT or the works council has signed off" is a yes — that is a scheduling question, and we would rather wait for it than start on something invented.
When we are not the right people.
Better said now than after four weeks of both our time. If one of these describes you, we would tell you on the first call anyway.
You have a development or AI team
A company that could build this will build it, and should. The same goes for a group platform mandated by a corporate parent or a PE owner — we would be a duplicate you have to defend internally.
There is no funded post behind the work
No vacancy, no supplier or BPO invoice, no overtime cost attached to the queue. Then there is no budget this comes out of, and we would be asking you to invent one.
The pain is a strategy, not a queue
"We want to become AI-capable" is a fine ambition and a bad first transaction. If the deliverable cannot be described before the meeting, there is nothing here to buy yet.
Fewer than 150 people
Below that, both are usually missing: depth and budget. We would rather say so than sell you a small version of it.
A contracting party, not access to a tool.
TeamIntel is a product of Remote Native GmbH, Munich, registered at Amtsgericht München under HRB 239688. The work sample is delivered by a founder, which is why there are four a month. You get a company that signs, not a login.
One case, start to finish.
Worked example · synthetic data · not a customer result
Market communication · clearing case to billing
Incoming: A rejected message on a metering point: the supplier change did not take, and eleven months of consumption have never been billed.
- The message history is reconstructed end to end, and the rejection reason is resolved against the format rules in force on the date it was sent — not today’s.
- The metering values behind the case are summed, so the amount is the actual billable sum rather than an estimate.
- The correcting message is drafted with the statutory deadline stated beside it.
Back to you: A clearing case closed to the point of billing, with the euro amount named, waiting for the head of market communication to release it.
Four questions, then we agree a start date.
What we never ask for is written down and permanent — five categories, none of them negotiable later. The exact list →