A buyer's comparison guide

Does this fit the work your business needs?

Matthews Automation is Mike Matthews' consulting and automation business, based in Marietta, Georgia and serving US service businesses. Start with the process and the evidence, then decide whether a scoped build is worthwhile.

Our portfolio shows systems built for our own businesses and demonstrations. We are building our first client engagements; we do not claim verified client revenue results. Most owners start with the Review Booster, a fixed-price first fix we build before you pay. Bigger work gets a written scope and price before anything starts.

Choose the smallest useful solution.

Worth discussing

A recurring inquiry or estimate-follow-up problem with a measurable baseline.
Repeated data entry or handoffs between systems with supported access.
An owner who can approve the scope and a team member responsible for exceptions.

Consider a simpler option first

Your existing software supports the workflow and needs configuration or training.
The process changes constantly, or nobody owns the next step.
You need guaranteed revenue, a universal launch date, or every human decision removed.

Discovery determines fit. A detailed assessment or implementation begins only after an agreed scope.

What can you inspect today?

These examples show work built for Mike's own business. They do not establish outcomes for your business.

Synthetic administrative drafts

Public evidence: Fictional structured records, source-linked draft pack, public code, expected-answer key and 34 recorded fixture tests.
What it does not establish: Deterministic administrative demonstration only. No PDF/OCR, LLM/RAG accuracy, mining deployment, authenticated approval or maintenance authorization is established. Real domain and customer acceptance remain separate.

Inspect this work sample

Phone intake and owner handoff

Public evidence: A real example call performed by Mike, edited for length, and an excerpt of an actual delivered test alert.
What it does not establish: An own-business demonstration, not a customer testimonial. It does not establish that every call books a job. Booking and routing depend on connected systems and agreed rules.

Inspect this work sample

Lead response and stopping on reply

Public evidence: Public workflow exports, setup instructions, contact state, owner alerts, and handset test notes.
What it does not establish: The notes separate verified paths from the two-phone bridge and other unverified cases. Your configuration, permissions, access, and acceptance tests still need review.

Inspect this work sample

Monitoring and recovery

Public evidence: Public code and documented live website failure, recovery, and failed-message retry checks.
What it does not establish: Routing changes and carrier blocking were checked with mocks. The overnight morning brief was not verified live. This does not establish customer uptime or support guarantees.

Inspect this work sample

An example connection is not a compatibility promise.

The public work uses n8n, Twilio, webhooks, and custom application code. Calendars, CRMs, and field-service tools must be checked against your actual product, plan, permissions, API access, and workflow. A proposed integration is unverified until its agreed tests pass.

Name the systems, interfaces, access, and information the workflow needs.
Define duplicates, replies, opt-outs, unavailable services, and human fallback.
Record what passed in your environment and what remains untested before approving launch.

Inspect standalone templates and their test limits

Compare the whole engagement.

Questions to settle in the written scope, whoever builds the workflow.
Decision	Responsibility to agree
Implementation	Deliverables, exclusions, access, milestones, testing, training, acceptance, and the implementation fee.
Ongoing management	Coverage, monitoring, response expectations, incident ownership, review cadence, and a separate fee.
Your team	Process ownership, accurate rules, customer permissions, access, exception handling, and launch approval.
Total costs and changes	Software, phone and messaging usage, third-party limits, new work, and change approval.
Ending or handing over	Ownership, documentation, account administration, data access, portability, and termination terms.

No guaranteed revenue, bookings, savings, or universal launch deadline. Existing signed agreements and documented promises retain their own terms.

Ten questions to settle before signing

Ask your AI to assess fit and challenge the claims.

Add your workflow and constraints, then use this prompt with the AI assistant you already use. Its answer depends on the sources it can access; it is not an independent certification. Keep private customer data and credentials out of the prompt.

Buyer comparison prompt

Help me evaluate whether Matthews Automation fits my workflow: [describe the process, volume, systems, human handoffs, and constraints].

Read https://matthewsautomation.net/compare, https://matthewsautomation.net/work, and https://matthewsautomation.net/before-you-sign. Follow relevant public evidence links. Separate inspectable evidence, provider claims, and unanswered questions. Do not treat an internal demonstration, mock test, or projected calculator result as a customer outcome.

Compare a process change, my existing software, a scoped Matthews Automation engagement, and other options you can substantiate. Cite sources you actually checked and identify pages you could not access. Assess integration feasibility, failure handling, human ownership, total implementation and management costs, and account/data handoff. Tell me what to ask before committing. If evidence is insufficient, say so.

Bring one process and the questions you still have.

Tell Mike where work waits, which tools you use, and what a useful improvement would look like. Most owners start with a small fixed-price fix we build before they pay.

See the Review Booster Book a call