Define the first delivery
We agree on the workflow, sources, owners and what a working application should deliver.
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, AT WORK.
AI agents
at work.
You focused
on your business.
Tenex builds, deploys and supports agents that carry out tasks, connect information and help your team make informed decisions.
Agriculture · Hay production
From a field report to an operational view.
01 / INSIGHT FROM THE FRONT LINE
“We stored three stacks and twenty more bales. Harvesting is still underway.”
02 / SONAR ORGANIZES
Quantity, source and partial production. An unclear production order is flagged for the supervisor.
03 / THE TEAM FOLLOWS THROUGH
- Record
- Partial production
- Review
- Confirm production order
- Source
- Original report available
Production information is ready for review.
ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLEExplore the product ↗
INTELLIGENCE, IN PRACTICE.
Your team has a lot to do.
Tenex helps multiply what’s possible.
Tenex builds, implements and supports agents that work with your business systems and people. To move sales forward, resolve requests and run the operation with more context, fewer errors and less rework.
MORE CAPACITY TO OPERATE.MORE CLARITY TO DECIDE.
Connect and put into use
We implement scoped connections, configure the agents and test with the people doing the work.
Support and expand
We compare use against the starting point, refine the application and earn the next step through results.
TENEX PRODUCTS
Four ways to extend your team's capacity.
tenex.vendas
From initial interest to the next sales step.
Agents that connect sales conversations to your business systems to move the sale forward. While one agent understands the request, others check availability, terms and delivery. The team receives an organized opportunity with the next step prepared.
View product pagetenex.vendas
From a request to a prepared quote
Illustrative demonstration · fictional data
The need becomes an opportunity.
Need recorded
Opportunity identified
- Item
- ACIII · 20 bags
- Need
- Downtown · by Friday
- Still needed
- Delivery postal code
The next question has a purpose.
The request is organized alongside what remains to confirm. The team avoids repeated questions and starts negotiation with the customer’s need in view.
Sources and agent work1
Behind this step
Connections and each agent’s tasks are defined in the application scope. This scenario brings sources and prepared actions together to show how the work continues.
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- 01Fictional request
“I need 20 bags of ACIII tile adhesive downtown by Friday. Do you have it?”
Agents check the sales context.
Checked, not reserved
References checked
- Catalog
- ACIII · 20 kg bag
- Availability
- 80 bags · not reserved
- Terms
- R$32/bag · shipping to check
An answer grounded in the operation.
Agents connect the request to available references and commercial rules. The team sees the matching option and which terms still require confirmation.
Sources and agent work3
Behind this step
Connections and each agent’s tasks are defined in the application scope. This scenario brings sources and prepared actions together to show how the work continues.
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- 01Fictional request
“I need 20 bags of ACIII tile adhesive downtown by Friday. Do you have it?”
- 02Fictional operational records
Catalog: ACIII tile adhesive, 20 kg. Stock checked: 80 bags, not reserved. Price: R$32/bag; 20 bags = R$640. Shipping cost and timing depend on the postal code.
- 03Rules for this scenario
Request the postal code before checking shipping cost and timing. Quote PR-028 is a draft: terms and sending require sales review; stock is not reserved.
The next step arrives prepared.
Sales review required
Proposal being prepared
- Quote
- PR-028
- Products
- 20 × R$32 = R$640
- Before sending
- Check postal code, delivery and terms
The salesperson receives prepared work.
The team receives the need, the matching item and the delivery question together. The salesperson can focus on terms and negotiation without reconstructing the request.
Sources and agent work3
Behind this step
Request the postal code before checking shipping cost and timing. Quote PR-028 is a draft: terms and sending require sales review; stock is not reserved.
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- 01Fictional request
“I need 20 bags of ACIII tile adhesive downtown by Friday. Do you have it?”
- 02Fictional operational records
Catalog: ACIII tile adhesive, 20 kg. Stock checked: 80 bags, not reserved. Price: R$32/bag; 20 bags = R$640. Shipping cost and timing depend on the postal code.
- 03Rules for this scenario
Request the postal code before checking shipping cost and timing. Quote PR-028 is a draft: terms and sending require sales review; stock is not reserved.
Sales continues with the context.
Team approval
Sales team view
- Next action
- Request postal code and check delivery
- Owner
- Sales team
- Status
- Draft ready for review
The sale advances with its context.
The team receives the need, the matching item and the delivery question together. The salesperson can focus on terms and negotiation without reconstructing the request.
Sources and agent work3
Behind this step
Request the postal code before checking shipping cost and timing. Quote PR-028 is a draft: terms and sending require sales review; stock is not reserved.
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- 01Fictional request
“I need 20 bags of ACIII tile adhesive downtown by Friday. Do you have it?”
- 02Fictional operational records
Catalog: ACIII tile adhesive, 20 kg. Stock checked: 80 bags, not reserved. Price: R$32/bag; 20 bags = R$640. Shipping cost and timing depend on the postal code.
- 03Rules for this scenario
Request the postal code before checking shipping cost and timing. Quote PR-028 is a draft: terms and sending require sales review; stock is not reserved.
The need becomes an opportunity.
Need recorded
Opportunity identified
- Specification
- Arabica · hard cup grade
- Volume
- 120 bags · next week
- To confirm
- Buyer details and collection terms
The next question has a purpose.
The request is organized alongside what remains to confirm. The team avoids repeated questions and starts negotiation with the customer’s need in view.
Sources and agent work1
Behind this step
Connections and each agent’s tasks are defined in the application scope. This scenario brings sources and prepared actions together to show how the work continues.
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- 01Fictional request
“I need 120 bags of arabica coffee, hard cup grade, for collection next week.”
Agents check the sales context.
Checked, not reserved
References checked
- Matching lot
- CF-24 · classification on file
- Stock checked
- 180 bags · 60 kg each
- Reference price
- R$1,200/bag · not reserved
An answer grounded in the operation.
Agents connect the request to available references and commercial rules. The team sees the matching option and which terms still require confirmation.
Sources and agent work3
Behind this step
Connections and each agent’s tasks are defined in the application scope. This scenario brings sources and prepared actions together to show how the work continues.
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- 01Fictional request
“I need 120 bags of arabica coffee, hard cup grade, for collection next week.”
- 02Fictional operational records
Lot CF-24: 180 bags of 60 kg, arabica hard cup grade, classification available. Reference price: R$1,200/bag. For 120 bags, subtotal R$144,000. Lot is not reserved.
- 03Rules for this scenario
Quote CF-012: confirm buyer registration, acceptance of classification, payment and collection window. Sales approves price and terms before sending; checking does not reserve the lot.
The next step arrives prepared.
Sales review required
Proposal being prepared
- Quote
- CF-012 · CF-24
- Subtotal
- 120 × R$1,200 = R$144,000
- Open items
- Classification, payment and collection
The salesperson receives prepared work.
Specification, lot and terms stay linked to one opportunity. Sales can focus on quality and agreement, with a prepared quote and the remaining confirmations clearly visible.
Sources and agent work3
Behind this step
Quote CF-012: confirm buyer registration, acceptance of classification, payment and collection window. Sales approves price and terms before sending; checking does not reserve the lot.
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- 01Fictional request
“I need 120 bags of arabica coffee, hard cup grade, for collection next week.”
- 02Fictional operational records
Lot CF-24: 180 bags of 60 kg, arabica hard cup grade, classification available. Reference price: R$1,200/bag. For 120 bags, subtotal R$144,000. Lot is not reserved.
- 03Rules for this scenario
Quote CF-012: confirm buyer registration, acceptance of classification, payment and collection window. Sales approves price and terms before sending; checking does not reserve the lot.
Sales continues with the context.
Team approval
Sales team view
- Next action
- Confirm terms with the buyer
- Owner
- Coffee sales team
- Status
- Quote prepared · approval pending
The sale advances with its context.
Specification, lot and terms stay linked to one opportunity. Sales can focus on quality and agreement, with a prepared quote and the remaining confirmations clearly visible.
Sources and agent work3
Behind this step
Quote CF-012: confirm buyer registration, acceptance of classification, payment and collection window. Sales approves price and terms before sending; checking does not reserve the lot.
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- 01Fictional request
“I need 120 bags of arabica coffee, hard cup grade, for collection next week.”
- 02Fictional operational records
Lot CF-24: 180 bags of 60 kg, arabica hard cup grade, classification available. Reference price: R$1,200/bag. For 120 bags, subtotal R$144,000. Lot is not reserved.
- 03Rules for this scenario
Quote CF-012: confirm buyer registration, acceptance of classification, payment and collection window. Sales approves price and terms before sending; checking does not reserve the lot.
The need becomes an opportunity.
Need recorded
Opportunity identified
- Goal
- Own home · 2 bedrooms
- Search
- Downtown · up to R$650,000
- Still needed
- Move-in timeline and payment
The next question has a purpose.
The request is organized alongside what remains to confirm. The team avoids repeated questions and starts negotiation with the customer’s need in view.
Sources and agent work1
Behind this step
Connections and each agent’s tasks are defined in the application scope. This scenario brings sources and prepared actions together to show how the work continues.
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- 01Fictional request
“I am looking for a two-bedroom home downtown, up to R$650,000.”
Agents check the sales context.
Checked, not reserved
References checked
- Matching unit
- Horizonte · 702
- Features
- 2 bedrooms · 64 m² · downtown
- Price list checked
- R$620,000 · not reserved
An answer grounded in the operation.
Agents connect the request to available references and commercial rules. The team sees the matching option and which terms still require confirmation.
Sources and agent work3
Behind this step
Connections and each agent’s tasks are defined in the application scope. This scenario brings sources and prepared actions together to show how the work continues.
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- 01Fictional request
“I am looking for a two-bedroom home downtown, up to R$650,000.”
- 02Fictional operational records
Fictional Horizonte development: unit 702, 2 bedrooms, 64 m², downtown, R$620,000 on the example price list. Available for inquiry, not reserved. Visits depend on the broker’s calendar.
- 03Rules for this scenario
Opportunity IM-041: confirm move-in timeline and payment method. The broker checks current terms and their calendar before confirming a viewing or offer. This demonstration does not simulate credit approval.
The next step arrives prepared.
Sales review required
Proposal being prepared
- Opportunity
- IM-041
- Prepared
- Unit facts and buyer requirements
- To verify
- Terms and viewing schedule
The salesperson receives prepared work.
The broker receives the buyer’s goal and a matching unit. The conversation can move toward terms and a viewing, while keeping outstanding confirmations visible.
Sources and agent work3
Behind this step
Opportunity IM-041: confirm move-in timeline and payment method. The broker checks current terms and their calendar before confirming a viewing or offer. This demonstration does not simulate credit approval.
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- 01Fictional request
“I am looking for a two-bedroom home downtown, up to R$650,000.”
- 02Fictional operational records
Fictional Horizonte development: unit 702, 2 bedrooms, 64 m², downtown, R$620,000 on the example price list. Available for inquiry, not reserved. Visits depend on the broker’s calendar.
- 03Rules for this scenario
Opportunity IM-041: confirm move-in timeline and payment method. The broker checks current terms and their calendar before confirming a viewing or offer. This demonstration does not simulate credit approval.
Sales continues with the context.
Team approval
Sales team view
- Next action
- Broker follows up with options and context
- Owner
- Development sales team
- Status
- Terms and viewing not yet confirmed
The sale advances with its context.
The broker receives the buyer’s goal and a matching unit. The conversation can move toward terms and a viewing, while keeping outstanding confirmations visible.
Sources and agent work3
Behind this step
Opportunity IM-041: confirm move-in timeline and payment method. The broker checks current terms and their calendar before confirming a viewing or offer. This demonstration does not simulate credit approval.
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- 01Fictional request
“I am looking for a two-bedroom home downtown, up to R$650,000.”
- 02Fictional operational records
Fictional Horizonte development: unit 702, 2 bedrooms, 64 m², downtown, R$620,000 on the example price list. Available for inquiry, not reserved. Visits depend on the broker’s calendar.
- 03Rules for this scenario
Opportunity IM-041: confirm move-in timeline and payment method. The broker checks current terms and their calendar before confirming a viewing or offer. This demonstration does not simulate credit approval.
tenex.atendimento
Useful answers. Resolution with context.
Agents that work toward resolving the request, from first contact through follow-up. They consult systems, identify what is missing and involve the right people with the context they need, so the team does not have to reconstruct the story at every handoff.
View product pagetenex.atendimento
One discrepancy, a task for each team
Illustrative demonstration · fictional data
Service identifies what needs resolving.
History to check
Request identified
- Order
- #4471
- Discrepancy
- 12 boxes paid · 10 received
- Preferred outcome
- Receive the remaining 2 boxes
The customer need not start again.
The request is linked to the order or history the team needs to check. Service identifies the open issue before seeking an answer or transferring the case.
Sources and agent work1
Behind this step
Connections and each agent’s tasks are defined in the application scope. This scenario brings sources and prepared actions together to show how the work continues.
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- 01Fictional request
“I paid for 12 boxes in order 4471, but only 10 arrived. How do we resolve this?”
The request finds the right records.
Latest available information
Evidence connected
- Order × delivery
- 2-box difference
- Payment
- Paid in full · confirmed
- To investigate
- Dispatch and completion delivery
The answer has a traceable source.
Records show what happened and what remains open. The team can inform the customer using available evidence while preserving confirmations that depend on other teams.
Sources and agent work3
Behind this step
Connections and each agent’s tasks are defined in the application scope. This scenario brings sources and prepared actions together to show how the work continues.
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- 01Fictional request
“I paid for 12 boxes in order 4471, but only 10 arrived. How do we resolve this?”
- 02Fictional operational records
Order 4471: 12 boxes sold, payment in full confirmed. Delivery receipt records 10 boxes. Dispatch must investigate the 2-box difference; the customer prefers to receive the remainder.
- 03Rules for this scenario
Case AT-032: record the discrepancy and inform the customer. Logistics checks dispatch and whether the remainder can be delivered. Finance receives an adjustment task only if completion is impossible and the solution is approved. No automatic refund.
Each owner receives a concrete task.
Resolution in progress
Reply and tasks prepared
- Service
- Discrepancy recorded and reply prepared
- Logistics
- Check dispatch and remaining delivery
- Finance
- Adjustment only if needed and approved
Resolution involves more than a reply.
The customer receives an answer grounded in the order, payment and delivery. Each team gets its task and the history, without transfers that require the customer to explain the issue again.
Sources and agent work3
Behind this step
Case AT-032: record the discrepancy and inform the customer. Logistics checks dispatch and whether the remainder can be delivered. Finance receives an adjustment task only if completion is impossible and the solution is approved. No automatic refund.
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- 01Fictional request
“I paid for 12 boxes in order 4471, but only 10 arrived. How do we resolve this?”
- 02Fictional operational records
Order 4471: 12 boxes sold, payment in full confirmed. Delivery receipt records 10 boxes. Dispatch must investigate the 2-box difference; the customer prefers to receive the remainder.
- 03Rules for this scenario
Case AT-032: record the discrepancy and inform the customer. Logistics checks dispatch and whether the remainder can be delivered. Finance receives an adjustment task only if completion is impossible and the solution is approved. No automatic refund.
The case continues until confirmation.
Completion still pending
Follow-up queue
- Case
- AT-032 · history retained
- Current owner
- Logistics · investigation pending
- Next check
- Confirm the resolution before closing
Owner, open task and history together.
The customer receives an answer grounded in the order, payment and delivery. Each team gets its task and the history, without transfers that require the customer to explain the issue again.
Sources and agent work3
Behind this step
Case AT-032: record the discrepancy and inform the customer. Logistics checks dispatch and whether the remainder can be delivered. Finance receives an adjustment task only if completion is impossible and the solution is approved. No automatic refund.
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- 01Fictional request
“I paid for 12 boxes in order 4471, but only 10 arrived. How do we resolve this?”
- 02Fictional operational records
Order 4471: 12 boxes sold, payment in full confirmed. Delivery receipt records 10 boxes. Dispatch must investigate the 2-box difference; the customer prefers to receive the remainder.
- 03Rules for this scenario
Case AT-032: record the discrepancy and inform the customer. Logistics checks dispatch and whether the remainder can be delivered. Finance receives an adjustment task only if completion is impossible and the solution is approved. No automatic refund.
Service identifies what needs resolving.
History to check
Request identified
- Order
- 217 · 120 bags of coffee
- Need
- Arrange receiving
- To check
- Loading and the dispatch update
The customer need not start again.
The request is linked to the order or history the team needs to check. Service identifies the open issue before seeking an answer or transferring the case.
Sources and agent work1
Behind this step
Connections and each agent’s tasks are defined in the application scope. This scenario brings sources and prepared actions together to show how the work continues.
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- 01Fictional request
“The coffee in order 217 was due to leave today. Has it been loaded? I need to arrange receiving.”
The request finds the right records.
Latest available information
Evidence connected
- Latest record
- Dispatch · 2pm
- Status
- Awaiting vehicle
- Still pending
- Loading confirmation
The answer has a traceable source.
Records show what happened and what remains open. The team can inform the customer using available evidence while preserving confirmations that depend on other teams.
Sources and agent work3
Behind this step
Connections and each agent’s tasks are defined in the application scope. This scenario brings sources and prepared actions together to show how the work continues.
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- 01Fictional request
“The coffee in order 217 was due to leave today. Has it been loaded? I need to arrange receiving.”
- 02Fictional operational records
Order 217: 120 bags, departure planned today. Dispatch log at 2pm: awaiting the vehicle. Loading and a revised arrival time for the buyer have not been confirmed.
- 03Rules for this scenario
Case AG-019: communicate the recorded status and ask logistics to confirm the vehicle and loading window. Update the buyer after confirmation. Do not turn the original estimate into an arrival promise.
Each owner receives a concrete task.
Resolution in progress
Reply and tasks prepared
- Customer
- Reply prepared with the 2pm status
- Logistics
- Confirm vehicle and loading window
- Arrival time
- Not confirmed
Resolution involves more than a reply.
The buyer receives the latest available fact, and logistics gets a specific open task. The history connects dispatch and service, helping coordinate receiving without inventing a delivery date.
Sources and agent work3
Behind this step
Case AG-019: communicate the recorded status and ask logistics to confirm the vehicle and loading window. Update the buyer after confirmation. Do not turn the original estimate into an arrival promise.
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- 01Fictional request
“The coffee in order 217 was due to leave today. Has it been loaded? I need to arrange receiving.”
- 02Fictional operational records
Order 217: 120 bags, departure planned today. Dispatch log at 2pm: awaiting the vehicle. Loading and a revised arrival time for the buyer have not been confirmed.
- 03Rules for this scenario
Case AG-019: communicate the recorded status and ask logistics to confirm the vehicle and loading window. Update the buyer after confirmation. Do not turn the original estimate into an arrival promise.
The case continues until confirmation.
Completion still pending
Follow-up queue
- Case
- AG-019
- Owner
- Dispatch logistics
- Next step
- Update buyer after confirmation
Owner, open task and history together.
The buyer receives the latest available fact, and logistics gets a specific open task. The history connects dispatch and service, helping coordinate receiving without inventing a delivery date.
Sources and agent work3
Behind this step
Case AG-019: communicate the recorded status and ask logistics to confirm the vehicle and loading window. Update the buyer after confirmation. Do not turn the original estimate into an arrival promise.
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- 01Fictional request
“The coffee in order 217 was due to leave today. Has it been loaded? I need to arrange receiving.”
- 02Fictional operational records
Order 217: 120 bags, departure planned today. Dispatch log at 2pm: awaiting the vehicle. Loading and a revised arrival time for the buyer have not been confirmed.
- 03Rules for this scenario
Case AG-019: communicate the recorded status and ask logistics to confirm the vehicle and loading window. Update the buyer after confirmation. Do not turn the original estimate into an arrival promise.
Service identifies what needs resolving.
History to check
Request identified
- Unit
- Horizonte · 304
- Issue
- Window will not close
- Already provided
- Photos in ticket 082
The customer need not start again.
The request is linked to the order or history the team needs to check. Service identifies the open issue before seeking an answer or transferring the case.
Sources and agent work1
Behind this step
Connections and each agent’s tasks are defined in the application scope. This scenario brings sources and prepared actions together to show how the work continues.
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- 01Fictional request
“The window in unit 304 will not close. I already sent photos in my previous conversation.”
The request finds the right records.
Latest available information
Evidence connected
- History
- Photos and previous report found
- Document
- Handover record available
- Missing
- Technical assessment and appointment
The answer has a traceable source.
Records show what happened and what remains open. The team can inform the customer using available evidence while preserving confirmations that depend on other teams.
Sources and agent work3
Behind this step
Connections and each agent’s tasks are defined in the application scope. This scenario brings sources and prepared actions together to show how the work continues.
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- 01Fictional request
“The window in unit 304 will not close. I already sent photos in my previous conversation.”
- 02Fictional operational records
Unit 304 in the fictional Horizonte development. Handover document available. Ticket 082 contains window photos and the buyer’s report, but no technical assessment or confirmed appointment.
- 03Rules for this scenario
Case IM-082: reuse the photos and history. Technical service must assess the issue and arrange a visit window with the buyer. Do not assert a cause, coverage or repair deadline before assessment.
Each owner receives a concrete task.
Resolution in progress
Reply and tasks prepared
- Service
- Reply prepared without requesting photos again
- Technical service
- Assess the window and arrange a visit
- Coverage and timing
- Depend on the assessment
Resolution involves more than a reply.
The buyer does not need to resend information already on file. Technical service receives the issue, documents and a defined task, while service follows the appointment and assessment.
Sources and agent work3
Behind this step
Case IM-082: reuse the photos and history. Technical service must assess the issue and arrange a visit window with the buyer. Do not assert a cause, coverage or repair deadline before assessment.
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- 01Fictional request
“The window in unit 304 will not close. I already sent photos in my previous conversation.”
- 02Fictional operational records
Unit 304 in the fictional Horizonte development. Handover document available. Ticket 082 contains window photos and the buyer’s report, but no technical assessment or confirmed appointment.
- 03Rules for this scenario
Case IM-082: reuse the photos and history. Technical service must assess the issue and arrange a visit window with the buyer. Do not assert a cause, coverage or repair deadline before assessment.
The case continues until confirmation.
Completion still pending
Follow-up queue
- Case
- IM-082 · documents linked
- Owner
- Technical service
- Next step
- Confirm an appointment with the buyer
Owner, open task and history together.
The buyer does not need to resend information already on file. Technical service receives the issue, documents and a defined task, while service follows the appointment and assessment.
Sources and agent work3
Behind this step
Case IM-082: reuse the photos and history. Technical service must assess the issue and arrange a visit window with the buyer. Do not assert a cause, coverage or repair deadline before assessment.
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- 01Fictional request
“The window in unit 304 will not close. I already sent photos in my previous conversation.”
- 02Fictional operational records
Unit 304 in the fictional Horizonte development. Handover document available. Ticket 082 contains window photos and the buyer’s report, but no technical assessment or confirmed appointment.
- 03Rules for this scenario
Case IM-082: reuse the photos and history. Technical service must assess the issue and arrange a visit window with the buyer. Do not assert a cause, coverage or repair deadline before assessment.
tenex.sonar
What your team notices reaches the people running the business.
The experience of people on the front line becomes information people can act on. Through voice or text, your team reports what it sees. Sonar organizes the reports, identifies recurring patterns and brings signals with context to the people who can respond.
View product pagetenex.sonar
Demand that did not become a sale
Illustrative demonstration · fictional data
A request the sales system never saw.
Received
A new report has arrived
- Source
- Store 01
- Information type
- Demand without a sale
- Next step
- Identify the product and reason
Demand becomes visible, even without a sale.
Purchasing learns of a request that might otherwise stay in an associate’s memory. Product, store and source travel with the record so the team can check it before interpreting it as demand.
Sources and agent work1
Behind this step
A sales associate reports what did not reach the checkout.
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- R01Store 01 · Monday
A customer asked for the XPTO running shoe in size 44. That size was unavailable.
Speech becomes comparable information.
Ready for review
Structured report
- Product
- Running shoe
- Model / size
- XPTO · 44
- Reported reason
- Size unavailable
Reports management can compare.
Product, size and location become organized for comparison. The team spends less effort reconstructing messages and can distinguish a complete record from information that still needs confirmation.
Sources and agent work1
Behind this step
Sonar structures the report and keeps its source attached.
- Source retained
- Report R01 · Store 01
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- R01Store 01 · Monday
A customer asked for the XPTO running shoe in size 44. That size was unavailable.
A pattern becomes visible across stores.
Signal to evaluate
Unfulfilled demand · XPTO 44
- Grouped reports
- 5
- Stores reporting
- 4
- Shared issue
- Size unavailable
A recurring issue for purchasing to investigate.
Reports from different stores help assess a local shortage or a broader signal. Five reports do not establish five unique customers; the evidence remains available for review.
Sources and agent work5
Behind this step
Reports about the same item are grouped for evaluation.
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- R01Store 01 · Monday
A customer asked for the XPTO running shoe in size 44. That size was unavailable.
- R02Store 02 · Monday
We had a request for the XPTO in size 44. The customer did not complete a purchase.
- R03Store 03 · Tuesday
Size 44 of the XPTO model was missing during a customer interaction.
- R04Store 01 · Wednesday
Another report about the missing XPTO 44. The customer’s identity was not recorded.
- R05Store 04 · Wednesday
Someone asked for the XPTO in size 44. It was unavailable at the store.
The evidence reaches the right team.
Human evaluation
Purchasing team’s review queue
- To evaluate
- Stock, distribution and replenishment
- Owner
- Purchasing team
- Basis for evaluation
- Reports linked to their stores
A queue of opportunities with evidence.
Purchasing receives the reports supporting each signal and can prioritize availability checks. Replenishment, stock transfers and assortment changes still depend on business evaluation.
Sources and agent work5
Behind this step
Purchasing reviews the context before making a decision.
- Purchasing decision
- Not yet made
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- R01Store 01 · Monday
A customer asked for the XPTO running shoe in size 44. That size was unavailable.
- R02Store 02 · Monday
We had a request for the XPTO in size 44. The customer did not complete a purchase.
- R03Store 03 · Tuesday
Size 44 of the XPTO model was missing during a customer interaction.
- R04Store 01 · Wednesday
Another report about the missing XPTO 44. The customer’s identity was not recorded.
- R05Store 04 · Wednesday
Someone asked for the XPTO in size 44. It was unavailable at the store.
The interruption arrives from the people in the field.
Incomplete context
Report received
- Activity
- Coffee harvest · crew 2
- Reported start
- 09:00
- Ask the crew
- Equipment and plot
Waiting becomes visible.
Coordination receives the issue while work is underway. A follow-up identifies equipment and location without asking the crew to repeat the whole report.
Sources and agent work1
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- C01Harvest crew report
The machine on coffee crew two has stopped again. The team has been waiting since nine.
The report gains equipment and location.
Cause still unknown
Report organized
- Equipment
- C-07
- Location
- Plot 12 · crew 2
- Reported status
- Crew waiting since 09:00
The responsible team knows where to check.
Location, equipment and time become comparable with other records. The observation stays linked to its source, with diagnosis kept separate from what the crew actually reported.
Sources and agent work2
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- C01Harvest crew report
The machine on coffee crew two has stopped again. The team has been waiting since nine.
- C02Team follow-up
It is harvester C-07 in plot 12. We do not yet know why it stopped.
Two reports point to the same context.
Reports, not a diagnosis
Recurring issue to investigate
- Reports
- 2
- Shared context
- C-07 · plot 12
- To check
- Cause and required action
History helps prioritize attention.
Coordination sees the recurrence without searching scattered messages. The team can investigate the shared context without treating two reports as proof of a mechanical cause.
Sources and agent work3
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- C01Harvest crew report
The machine on coffee crew two has stopped again. The team has been waiting since nine.
- C02Team follow-up
It is harvester C-07 in plot 12. We do not yet know why it stopped.
- C03Earlier report
Yesterday, another report described C-07 stopping in plot 12. No diagnosis is recorded.
The issue reaches the people coordinating the work.
Human assessment
Coordination queue
- Owner
- Field coordination
- Evaluate
- Maintenance and crew allocation
- Pending confirmation
- Action and resumption of work
Frontline observations help set priorities.
Management receives the reported facts and the coordination task. It can evaluate maintenance and work allocation with sources at hand, without assuming losses or unreported production.
Sources and agent work4
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- C01Harvest crew report
The machine on coffee crew two has stopped again. The team has been waiting since nine.
- C02Team follow-up
It is harvester C-07 in plot 12. We do not yet know why it stopped.
- C03Earlier report
Yesterday, another report described C-07 stopping in plot 12. No diagnosis is recorded.
- C04Coordination rule
Group reports by equipment and location. Coordination evaluates maintenance support and crew allocation; do not infer cause, loss or missed production.
A report arrives while work is underway.
Partial production
Production report received
- Product
- Tifton hay
- Location
- North Barn
- Reported quantity
- 3 full stacks
The record starts close to the work.
Information moves on for processing without closing a production order.
Sources and agent work1
Behind this step
Partial production is reported by the people doing the work.
- Situation
- Harvesting in progress
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- A01Field report
We stored three full stacks of Tifton hay in the North Barn. Harvesting is still in progress.
A local rule interprets the quantity.
Needs review
Interpreted quantity
- Original report
- 3 full stacks
- Rule applied
- 40 bales per stack
- Calculated quantity
- 120 bales
The calculation has a traceable source.
This conversion applies only to this example’s configuration; each operation defines its own rule.
Sources and agent work2
Behind this step
The conversion is visible and can be inspected.
- Production state
- Partial
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- A01Field report
We stored three full stacks of Tifton hay in the North Barn. Harvesting is still in progress.
- A02Rule configured for this example
In this example’s North Barn, one full stack equals 40 bales. This rule depends on the operation; it is not a universal conversion.
An ambiguity reaches the supervisor.
Supervisor’s choice
Production report review
- Quantity to assign
- 120 bales
- Location
- North Barn
The uncertainty is made explicit.
Select an order to see how the record moves into the next step.
Choose the production order and check sources3
Which order matches the report?
The supervisor must confirm the association.
Behind this step
Two orders can match the same location. Human context resolves the association.
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- A01Field report
We stored three full stacks of Tifton hay in the North Barn. Harvesting is still in progress.
- A02Rule configured for this example
In this example’s North Barn, one full stack equals 40 bales. This rule depends on the operation; it is not a universal conversion.
- A03Available orders in the example
OP-014: Tuesday harvest. OP-018: Thursday harvest. Both permit storage in the North Barn.
The office sees what was reviewed.
Record for review
Production follow-up
- Reported quantity
- 120 bales
- Production
- Partial · harvesting in progress
Linked production orderProduction order not yet confirmed
Management can follow records and open items.
This demonstration does not close an order or write data to an ERP.
Sources and agent work3
Behind this step
The report keeps its link to the source, the rule and the supervisor’s choice.
- Next task
- Office review and export
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- A01Field report
We stored three full stacks of Tifton hay in the North Barn. Harvesting is still in progress.
- A02Rule configured for this example
In this example’s North Barn, one full stack equals 40 bales. This rule depends on the operation; it is not a universal conversion.
- A03Available orders in the example
OP-014: Tuesday harvest. OP-018: Thursday harvest. Both permit storage in the North Barn.
Inspection captures what the team found.
Received from the field
Inspection issue
- Location
- Tower B · unit 304
- Component
- Bedroom window
- Reported evidence
- Photo linked to the report
The observation stays with the unit.
The inspection finding gains a location and source. Coordination can find the issue without relying on someone’s memory of the visit or an isolated message.
Sources and agent work1
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- I01Inspection report
During inspection in tower B, the bedroom window in unit 304 did not close properly. A photo is attached to the report.
Location and component become comparable.
Cause not determined
Issue ready for review
- Unit
- 304 · B
- Type
- Window closing
- Next check
- Technical assessment of the component
Less work to reconstruct the inspection.
The description is organized without replacing the team’s observation. Engineering can check the component, unit and source before determining cause or responsibility.
Sources and agent work2
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- I01Inspection report
During inspection in tower B, the bedroom window in unit 304 did not close properly. A photo is attached to the report.
- I03Follow-up rule
Relate reports by component and tower while retaining unit details. Engineering evaluates cause and responsibility; service follows the correction and reinspection. Do not conclude there is a widespread defect.
A recurring issue becomes visible in the tower.
Recurrence to investigate
Context for engineering
- Records
- 2 reports · 2 units
- Shared issue
- Bedroom window · tower B
- Not concluded
- Shared cause or widespread defect
Reports help guide the investigation.
Engineering sees the shared context and can assess other units when appropriate. The recurrence is a signal to investigate, accompanied by the reports supporting it.
Sources and agent work3
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- I01Inspection report
During inspection in tower B, the bedroom window in unit 304 did not close properly. A photo is attached to the report.
- I02Second team report
Unit 504, tower B: bedroom window adjustment pending. The cause has not been checked.
- I03Follow-up rule
Relate reports by component and tower while retaining unit details. Engineering evaluates cause and responsibility; service follows the correction and reinspection. Do not conclude there is a widespread defect.
Technical assessment has a clear queue.
Assessment and follow-up pending
Coordination view
- Engineering
- Assess cause and responsibility
- Service
- Follow correction and reinspection
- Closure
- Requires team confirmation
Management follows actions and open items.
Each team receives the context needed for its work. Coordination can follow the correction without turning the initial report into an automatic diagnosis or conclusion.
Sources and agent work3
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- I01Inspection report
During inspection in tower B, the bedroom window in unit 304 did not close properly. A photo is attached to the report.
- I02Second team report
Unit 504, tower B: bedroom window adjustment pending. The cause has not been checked.
- I03Follow-up rule
Relate reports by component and tower while retaining unit details. Engineering evaluates cause and responsibility; service follows the correction and reinspection. Do not conclude there is a widespread defect.
tenex.brain
Connect your business to see the next move.
tenex.brain brings together system data, meetings and company information to identify opportunities and support decisions. Agents connect signals, check context and present evidence-backed recommendations before you have to go looking for what to improve.
View product pagetenex.brain
Replenish before the campaign?
Illustrative demonstration · fictional data
Data and decisions inform one assessment.
Source and update time retained
Connected context
- Systems
- Operations, sales and finance
- Knowledge
- Meeting and previous decisions
- Updated
- 08:00–08:15 · depending on source
Operational facts meet the reason for the decision.
Management reviews data alongside the team’s agreements. Sources and update times remain visible, distinguishing what is confirmed from what still needs checking.
Sources and agent work4
Behind this step
Sources and update frequency are defined in the project. An analytical base can consolidate copies of authorized data while preserving source systems and company permissions.
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- B01Sales and stock · 08:00
Vértice model: 30 sales in stores 1 and 2 in the last 7 days, versus 18 in the preceding 7 days. Local stock: 8 unallocated pairs. Store 3: 24 pairs, 10 reserved. Fictional data.
- B02Purchasing · 08:15
An order for 40 pairs is expected Thursday, without carrier confirmation. The supplier offers a discount on a new batch only with advance payment.
- B03Finance · 08:10
Advance purchasing uses cash already allocated for campaign week. Installments must be negotiated; no new purchase is approved.
- B04Sales meeting · Monday
Friday’s campaign prioritizes stores 1 and 2. The team asked to preserve service in other stores and confirm the incoming order before expanding the purchase.
An opportunity appears before the question.
Observed signal · hypothesis to check
Opportunity for management
- Observed signal
- 30 sales in 7 days · previously 18
- Locally available
- 8 unallocated pairs · stores 1 and 2
- Context
- Friday campaign
Management receives an evidence-based point of attention.
Agents relate an operational change to company context. Management gains an opportunity to discuss, with the observed evidence, without having to start with a search or question.
Sources and agent work4
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- B01Sales and stock · 08:00
Vértice model: 30 sales in stores 1 and 2 in the last 7 days, versus 18 in the preceding 7 days. Local stock: 8 unallocated pairs. Store 3: 24 pairs, 10 reserved. Fictional data.
- B02Purchasing · 08:15
An order for 40 pairs is expected Thursday, without carrier confirmation. The supplier offers a discount on a new batch only with advance payment.
- B03Finance · 08:10
Advance purchasing uses cash already allocated for campaign week. Installments must be negotiated; no new purchase is approved.
- B04Sales meeting · Monday
Friday’s campaign prioritizes stores 1 and 2. The team asked to preserve service in other stores and confirm the incoming order before expanding the purchase.
Other agents challenge the first hypothesis.
Connected perspectives
Checks that change the assessment
- Operations
- 40 pairs incoming; arrival unconfirmed
- Inventory
- Store 3 has 14 unallocated pairs, not 24
- Finance
- Discount requires upfront cash
The suggestion improves as context is checked.
Agents check information that could change the initial proposal. Management can open the review and follow the shift from an initial hypothesis to a recommendation with explicit constraints.
Why did the recommendation change?4
- 01
Initial hypothesis
Bring forward a new purchase to support the campaign.
- 02
Evidence that changed the assessment
Operations: 40 pairs incoming; arrival unconfirmed; Inventory: Store 3 has 14 unallocated pairs, not 24; Finance: Discount requires upfront cash.
- 03
Revised recommendation
Confirm the pending delivery, prioritize stores 1 and 2, and evaluate redistribution or installment supply before expanding the purchase.
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- B01Sales and stock · 08:00
Vértice model: 30 sales in stores 1 and 2 in the last 7 days, versus 18 in the preceding 7 days. Local stock: 8 unallocated pairs. Store 3: 24 pairs, 10 reserved. Fictional data.
- B02Purchasing · 08:15
An order for 40 pairs is expected Thursday, without carrier confirmation. The supplier offers a discount on a new batch only with advance payment.
- B03Finance · 08:10
Advance purchasing uses cash already allocated for campaign week. Installments must be negotiated; no new purchase is approved.
- B04Sales meeting · Monday
Friday’s campaign prioritizes stores 1 and 2. The team asked to preserve service in other stores and confirm the incoming order before expanding the purchase.
Management receives a prepared decision.
Recommendation · human approval
Next move to evaluate
- Suggested priority
- Confirm Thursday delivery
- Evaluate with the team
- Redistribution and installment purchasing
- Decision owner
- Sales management, purchasing and finance
More context to discuss the next move.
Management receives an opportunity alongside stock, commitments and campaign context. It can discuss alternatives before committing cash, understanding why the initial hypothesis was revised.
Why did the recommendation change?4
- 01
Initial hypothesis
Bring forward a new purchase to support the campaign.
- 02
Evidence that changed the assessment
Operations: 40 pairs incoming; arrival unconfirmed; Inventory: Store 3 has 14 unallocated pairs, not 24; Finance: Discount requires upfront cash.
- 03
Revised recommendation
Confirm the pending delivery, prioritize stores 1 and 2, and evaluate redistribution or installment supply before expanding the purchase.
Behind this step
Agent roles in this scenario are illustrative. Actual organization, sources and permitted actions are configured for each application. Opening the explanation does not purchase, amend contracts or send messages.
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- B01Sales and stock · 08:00
Vértice model: 30 sales in stores 1 and 2 in the last 7 days, versus 18 in the preceding 7 days. Local stock: 8 unallocated pairs. Store 3: 24 pairs, 10 reserved. Fictional data.
- B02Purchasing · 08:15
An order for 40 pairs is expected Thursday, without carrier confirmation. The supplier offers a discount on a new batch only with advance payment.
- B03Finance · 08:10
Advance purchasing uses cash already allocated for campaign week. Installments must be negotiated; no new purchase is approved.
- B04Sales meeting · Monday
Friday’s campaign prioritizes stores 1 and 2. The team asked to preserve service in other stores and confirm the incoming order before expanding the purchase.
Data and decisions inform one assessment.
Source and update time retained
Connected context
- Systems
- Operations, sales and finance
- Knowledge
- Meeting and previous decisions
- Updated
- 08:00–08:30 · depending on source
Operational facts meet the reason for the decision.
Management reviews data alongside the team’s agreements. Sources and update times remain visible, distinguishing what is confirmed from what still needs checking.
Sources and agent work4
Behind this step
Sources and update frequency are defined in the project. An analytical base can consolidate copies of authorized data while preserving source systems and company permissions.
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- B01Stock and contracts · 08:00
120 classified bags; 80 already linked to another contract. Order 218 requires 100 bags by Friday. Figures are fictional.
- B02Processing · 08:20
A 90-bag lot is scheduled for classification on Thursday. Final quantity and classification depend on approval by the responsible person.
- B03Dispatch · 08:30
Friday’s loading window still needs carrier confirmation. No contract change has been approved.
- B04Coordination meeting · Monday
Prioritize order 218 while preserving existing commitments. Before offering another lot, check its classification and confirm dispatch capacity.
An opportunity appears before the question.
Observed signal · hypothesis to check
Opportunity for management
- Commitment
- Order 218 · 100 bags by Friday
- Total stock
- 120 classified bags
- To check
- Commitments and lot release
Management receives an evidence-based point of attention.
Agents relate an operational change to company context. Management gains an opportunity to discuss, with the observed evidence, without having to start with a search or question.
Sources and agent work4
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- B01Stock and contracts · 08:00
120 classified bags; 80 already linked to another contract. Order 218 requires 100 bags by Friday. Figures are fictional.
- B02Processing · 08:20
A 90-bag lot is scheduled for classification on Thursday. Final quantity and classification depend on approval by the responsible person.
- B03Dispatch · 08:30
Friday’s loading window still needs carrier confirmation. No contract change has been approved.
- B04Coordination meeting · Monday
Prioritize order 218 while preserving existing commitments. Before offering another lot, check its classification and confirm dispatch capacity.
Other agents challenge the first hypothesis.
Connected perspectives
Checks that change the assessment
- Contracts
- 80 bags already committed; 40 free
- Production
- 90 bags await classification
- Dispatch
- Friday window still to confirm
The suggestion improves as context is checked.
Agents check information that could change the initial proposal. Management can open the review and follow the shift from an initial hypothesis to a recommendation with explicit constraints.
Why did the recommendation change?4
- 01
Initial hypothesis
Use the 120-bag stock to prepare order 218.
- 02
Evidence that changed the assessment
Contracts: 80 bags already committed; 40 free; Production: 90 bags await classification; Dispatch: Friday window still to confirm.
- 03
Revised recommendation
Prioritize classification of the pending lot and confirm the dispatch window; evaluate fulfillment without using stock committed elsewhere.
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- B01Stock and contracts · 08:00
120 classified bags; 80 already linked to another contract. Order 218 requires 100 bags by Friday. Figures are fictional.
- B02Processing · 08:20
A 90-bag lot is scheduled for classification on Thursday. Final quantity and classification depend on approval by the responsible person.
- B03Dispatch · 08:30
Friday’s loading window still needs carrier confirmation. No contract change has been approved.
- B04Coordination meeting · Monday
Prioritize order 218 while preserving existing commitments. Before offering another lot, check its classification and confirm dispatch capacity.
Management receives a prepared decision.
Recommendation · human approval
Next move to evaluate
- Suggested priority
- Confirm classification and release
- Coordination
- Production, sales and dispatch
- Constraint
- Preserve the 80 committed bags
More context to discuss the next move.
Production, stock and contracts become part of the same decision. Management can coordinate priorities with open items visible, avoiding treating all stock as available or promising an unreleased lot.
Why did the recommendation change?4
- 01
Initial hypothesis
Use the 120-bag stock to prepare order 218.
- 02
Evidence that changed the assessment
Contracts: 80 bags already committed; 40 free; Production: 90 bags await classification; Dispatch: Friday window still to confirm.
- 03
Revised recommendation
Prioritize classification of the pending lot and confirm the dispatch window; evaluate fulfillment without using stock committed elsewhere.
Behind this step
Agent roles in this scenario are illustrative. Actual organization, sources and permitted actions are configured for each application. Opening the explanation does not purchase, amend contracts or send messages.
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- B01Stock and contracts · 08:00
120 classified bags; 80 already linked to another contract. Order 218 requires 100 bags by Friday. Figures are fictional.
- B02Processing · 08:20
A 90-bag lot is scheduled for classification on Thursday. Final quantity and classification depend on approval by the responsible person.
- B03Dispatch · 08:30
Friday’s loading window still needs carrier confirmation. No contract change has been approved.
- B04Coordination meeting · Monday
Prioritize order 218 while preserving existing commitments. Before offering another lot, check its classification and confirm dispatch capacity.
Data and decisions inform one assessment.
Source and update time retained
Connected context
- Systems
- Operations, sales and finance
- Knowledge
- Meeting and previous decisions
- Updated
- 08:00–08:15 · depending on source
Operational facts meet the reason for the decision.
Management reviews data alongside the team’s agreements. Sources and update times remain visible, distinguishing what is confirmed from what still needs checking.
Sources and agent work4
Behind this step
Sources and update frequency are defined in the project. An analytical base can consolidate copies of authorized data while preserving source systems and company permissions.
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- B01Availability and sales · 08:00
Horizonte has 12 units without a recorded sale; 4 have proposals under review. There were 2 sales in the most recently completed month versus 5 in the preceding completed month. Fictional example.
- B02CRM and proposals · 08:10
Four proposals await document review. The CRM records an owner and deadline for each; no rejection or final acceptance is recorded.
- B03Receipts · 08:15
Expected down payments this month depend on formalizing two proposals. Do not treat projected receipts as cash received.
- B04Management meeting · Monday
Before proposing a general discount, review active proposals and identify the reason for each open item. Price and term changes require approval.
An opportunity appears before the question.
Observed signal · hypothesis to check
Opportunity for management
- Last completed month
- 2 units · previously 5
- No recorded sale
- 12 units
- Context
- Management sales review
Management receives an evidence-based point of attention.
Agents relate an operational change to company context. Management gains an opportunity to discuss, with the observed evidence, without having to start with a search or question.
Sources and agent work4
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- B01Availability and sales · 08:00
Horizonte has 12 units without a recorded sale; 4 have proposals under review. There were 2 sales in the most recently completed month versus 5 in the preceding completed month. Fictional example.
- B02CRM and proposals · 08:10
Four proposals await document review. The CRM records an owner and deadline for each; no rejection or final acceptance is recorded.
- B03Receipts · 08:15
Expected down payments this month depend on formalizing two proposals. Do not treat projected receipts as cash received.
- B04Management meeting · Monday
Before proposing a general discount, review active proposals and identify the reason for each open item. Price and term changes require approval.
Other agents challenge the first hypothesis.
Connected perspectives
Checks that change the assessment
- Sales
- 4 units already have proposals under review
- Operations
- Document issues, not rejections
- Finance
- Expected down payments not yet received
The suggestion improves as context is checked.
Agents check information that could change the initial proposal. Management can open the review and follow the shift from an initial hypothesis to a recommendation with explicit constraints.
Why did the recommendation change?4
- 01
Initial hypothesis
Propose a general discount to accelerate new sales.
- 02
Evidence that changed the assessment
Sales: 4 units already have proposals under review; Operations: Document issues, not rejections; Finance: Expected down payments not yet received.
- 03
Revised recommendation
Prioritize document review for active proposals, confirm expected receipts and discuss commercial changes after evaluating these open items.
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- B01Availability and sales · 08:00
Horizonte has 12 units without a recorded sale; 4 have proposals under review. There were 2 sales in the most recently completed month versus 5 in the preceding completed month. Fictional example.
- B02CRM and proposals · 08:10
Four proposals await document review. The CRM records an owner and deadline for each; no rejection or final acceptance is recorded.
- B03Receipts · 08:15
Expected down payments this month depend on formalizing two proposals. Do not treat projected receipts as cash received.
- B04Management meeting · Monday
Before proposing a general discount, review active proposals and identify the reason for each open item. Price and term changes require approval.
Management receives a prepared decision.
Recommendation · human approval
Next move to evaluate
- Suggested priority
- Move pending proposals forward
- Review owners
- Sales, contracts and finance
- Price changes
- Remain subject to approval
More context to discuss the next move.
Management understands the sales decline alongside proposals and expected receipts. It can address the right open items and discuss terms with context before applying a development-wide discount.
Why did the recommendation change?4
- 01
Initial hypothesis
Propose a general discount to accelerate new sales.
- 02
Evidence that changed the assessment
Sales: 4 units already have proposals under review; Operations: Document issues, not rejections; Finance: Expected down payments not yet received.
- 03
Revised recommendation
Prioritize document review for active proposals, confirm expected receipts and discuss commercial changes after evaluating these open items.
Behind this step
Agent roles in this scenario are illustrative. Actual organization, sources and permitted actions are configured for each application. Opening the explanation does not purchase, amend contracts or send messages.
Fictional records created to explain this scenario.
- B01Availability and sales · 08:00
Horizonte has 12 units without a recorded sale; 4 have proposals under review. There were 2 sales in the most recently completed month versus 5 in the preceding completed month. Fictional example.
- B02CRM and proposals · 08:10
Four proposals await document review. The CRM records an owner and deadline for each; no rejection or final acceptance is recorded.
- B03Receipts · 08:15
Expected down payments this month depend on formalizing two proposals. Do not treat projected receipts as cash received.
- B04Management meeting · Monday
Before proposing a general discount, review active proposals and identify the reason for each open item. Price and term changes require approval.
APPLICATION CONTEXTS
In the field. In the store.
In the next home.
Explore industries FROM NEED TO OPERATION
From the first conversation
to ongoing operation.
See how it works - 01
Diagnose
We map the workflow, sources, exceptions and owners to define an opportunity.
- 02
Prioritize
We agree on the first application, its scope and delivery criteria.
- 03
Implement
We connect, test and put the first application into operation within 30 days.
- 04
Measure
We compare quality, time and use against the starting point and define adjustments.
- 05
Scale
We expand from results, with the next scope agreed alongside your team.
Measurement
Define what to improve. Track what changes.
Starting point
We understand the current process and what information can help assess a change.
Agreed criterion
We choose a measure of usefulness, quality or outcome that makes sense to the team.
Review with context
We look at the data, exceptions and users' experience to guide adjustments.
BEFORE WE START
Frequently asked questions
How long does it take to get started?
The first application goes into operation within 30 days, with scope defined alongside your team. Planning specifies sources, access and delivery criteria; expansion to other workflows is agreed afterward.
Who implements and supports the application?
Tenex understands the workflow, connects the agreed sources, configures the agents and puts the application into use with your team. We then track quality, adoption and adjustments, with owners and criteria defined from the start.
Do we need to replace our systems?
The aim is to connect the systems and information relevant to the chosen work. Feasible connections and source updates are defined during discovery.
Who decides what the agents can do?
Tenex configures the application using rules and responsibilities agreed with the business. Actions that need approval reach the accountable person with context.
Do we have to start with all four products?
No. The starting point is a need, and one product can be used independently. Expansion to further workflows, teams or products depends on results and the company’s interest.
How do we choose the first application?
We look for a relevant workflow, accessible information and an outcome the team can assess. We define scope, owners, the starting point and delivery criteria before implementation.
Do the demonstrations show real customers?
They are illustrative examples with fictional data, showing inputs, lookups, owners and benefits. Customer results are only presented with evidence and permission.