Sabina at work

See the work before you hire the employee.

Start with one recognizable responsibility. Watch an illustrated work example, explore how the same pattern appears in different businesses, then use your own numbers to evaluate the role.

The businesses and records in these examples are fictional. Financial illustrations are assumptions—not measured customer outcomes.

See Sabina work Watch the example

One promise

See how one customer promise can be handled.

An illustrated example of a proposal promise, a changed requirement and an authorized internal follow-up.

Illustrative workflow · Fictional records

Illustrative workflow · Fictional records · 1 min 38 sec · Sound, then a silent end card

A proposal promise
A changed requirement
An authorized internal follow-up

What carries forward: the changed requirement and the person who owns the follow-up, ready for the next conversation with that customer.

Read the detail: what the example shows and assumes

This animated example explains a workflow. It is not a recording of product execution, a customer testimonial or a measured customer result. Its time illustration assumes ten people, one hour of routine coordination per person per workday, five workdays per week and an 80% net reduction. The remaining 20% covers edge cases and review. Workday comparisons use eight hours per staff workday.

See the financial assumptions

Read the full transcript

A customer is waiting for a revised proposal. The promise was made. The work still has to get done. Let’s look at Harbor Service, a fictional company. Alex promises Morgan a revised service proposal by Friday at four. Then Morgan asks to add weekend support. The deadline hasn’t moved. But the work has changed. I keep the promise, the owner, the deadline, and the original email together. A teammate can see what’s owed, and why. An internal follow-up reminds Alex about the proposal and Morgan’s change. The responsibility stays open until there’s evidence it was kept. That’s follow-through inside the permissions you give me. Now, suppose Harbor has ten people, and each spends an hour a day keeping track of work and chasing updates. If I take on eighty percent of that effort, leaving the rest for edge cases and review, that gives each person four hours back a week. About seventeen hours a month per person. More than two full workdays each. Across ten people, it's more than 20 workdays freed up in total. Imagine putting that time into quotes that have been waiting, customers who deserve a little more attention, or the work your best people never seem to get to. The same people, with more time to do the work you hired them for. I’m your company’s own AI. You teach me the work and define my authority. Knowing isn’t permission. Owning the middle is where we start. What could your team do with that time back? Then you decide what comes next. Start your assessment at Hire Sabina dot A I slash evaluate.

See Sabina work

Start with a short assessment of your business.

Business scenarios

Different businesses. Recognizable work.

These are proposed jobs to evaluate, not assertions that every connection is supported.

Illustrative scenario · Not a customer case study

Roofing and other contractors: the revised estimate

Problem: A customer was promised a revised estimate. The estimator thinks sales owns the next step; sales thinks the estimator sent it.
Responsibility: Make the commitment, owner and deadline visible; follow up internally; prepare the permitted customer update. What carries forward: the revised scope, who owns the estimate and the date it was promised, ready for the next call with that customer.
Boundary: Sending a proposal, changing a price or making a new delivery promise follows the authority agreed for that role.
What to measure: Time spent chasing estimates, confirmed on-time sends and genuinely additional accepted work. A sent estimate is not a won job.

Illustrative scenario · Not a customer case study

AV, security and field service: the post-sale handoff

Problem: A project was sold, but equipment timing, the installation plan and the customer update sit in different conversations.
Responsibility: Bring the available context together, identify the next owner and follow up on the approved next step. What carries forward: the customer’s site requirements and the decision about installation timing, so the next teammate on the job does not have to ask again.
Boundary: Do not invent stock availability, book an unsupported installation slot or promise a date without the required confirmation and authority.
What to measure: Coordination time, unresolved handoffs and customer updates actually sent. Do not count an unverified avoided delay as savings.

Illustrative scenario · Not a customer case study

Property management: the vendor’s return visit

Problem: A vendor said they would return. The tenant expects an update, and the office has no confirmation that the work happened.
Responsibility: Follow up with the responsible party, request confirmation and prepare an appropriate update from the available facts. What carries forward: the vendor’s promised return date and the tenant’s access instructions, available to whoever handles the next request at that unit.
Boundary: A vendor’s promise is not proof of completion. Spending approvals and completion acceptance stay with the authorized person.
What to measure: Follow-up time, confirmed completion records and age of unresolved requests—not assumed rent retention or invented satisfaction gains.

Financial assumptions

Show the assumptions. Then do the math.

A business case should distinguish capacity returned, spending avoided and additional profitable work. This example uses invented inputs to show the method. It does not predict what Sabina will achieve.

Illustrative assumptions · Not industry averages · Not measured Sabina results

Illustrative per-employee and team capacity, before Sabina’s fees and setup costs
Input or result	Value	Meaning
Illustrative team size	10 people	Fictional scenario, not a measured customer team.
Routine coordination per employee	1 hour/workday	Assumed time keeping track of work and chasing updates.
Weekly coordination per employee	5 hours/week	1 hour × 5 workdays.
Net reduction in that effort	80%	Illustrative assumption; remaining 20% covers edge cases and review.
Net time returned per employee	4 hours/week	5 × 80%; no second review deduction.
Monthly time per employee	17.3 hours/month	4 × 52 ÷ 12; about 2.17 eight-hour staff workdays.
Monthly time across ten people	173.3 hours/month	17.333… × 10; about 21.7 eight-hour staff workdays.
Lower-reduction sensitivity	13 hours/person/month at 60%	Same one-hour daily baseline; 40% would return about 8.7 hours/person/month.

In this illustration, each employee has about 17 hours a month available for other work. Across ten people, that is about 173 hours, or more than twenty eight-hour staff workdays. This is capacity available, not cash saved. Payroll savings exist only when spending actually falls. The one-hour daily baseline and 80% net reduction must be tested for your company; they are not observed outcomes.

A recovered sale is not all profit.

A $5,000 job with $4,000 in incremental delivery costs contributes $1,000 before other incremental costs. Two genuinely additional jobs would therefore contribute $2,000—not $10,000 of profit. These figures illustrate the calculation; they do not assume Sabina wins those jobs.

Compare verified or explicitly modeled benefits with the quoted price for the actual role, ongoing oversight and any setup cost. Keep capacity value separate from cash effects. Do not count the same recovered time again as both payroll savings and additional production.

Use your own numbers

Fit

The fit is how your business runs—not one industry.

Customers ask for things. Work passes between people. Someone needs to follow up, and the owner becomes the backup memory.

That pattern can exist in a contractor, property manager, professional firm or service business. The starting question is what recurring responsibility your company needs help carrying.

Business types that may fit

Trades and installation

Roofing
plumbing
HVAC
electrical
general contracting and remodeling
restoration
AV integration
security, access-control and low-voltage installation

Business types that may fit

Recurring field service

Commercial equipment service
facilities maintenance
commercial cleaning
landscaping and irrigation
pest control
pool service
garage-door service

Business types that may fit

Property operations

Multifamily and other property management
community association/HOA management
commercial real-estate operations

Business types that may fit

Professional services

Law firms
accounting, bookkeeping and payroll firms
architecture and engineering firms
consulting, marketing and creative agencies

Business types that may fit

Insurance and staffing

Property-and-casualty insurance agencies and other suitable insurance offices
recruiting and staffing firms

Business types that may fit

Technology services

Managed IT service providers, IT support firms and technology consultancies

Business types that may fit

Other coordinated operations

Equipment rental
distribution and wholesale
logistics offices
manufacturers with service/order coordination
automotive repair and collision businesses
multi-location service companies

Business types that may fit

Administrative practice work

Medical and dental practices for appropriately scoped administrative responsibilities—not clinical decisions

Industry is a starting point, not a guarantee of fit. We review workflow volume, team handoffs, system access, decision authority and the financial case for the actual role. Professional decisions remain with the appropriately authorized people.

Independent research

What independent research has measured.

Researchers have measured benefits from AI assistance in specific kinds of work. These studies did not evaluate Sabina and do not predict the results for your business.

Customer-support work

15%

more issues resolved per hour, on average.

Human agents using AI assistance—not autonomous replacement of the team.

In a study covering 5,172 customer-support agents, access to AI assistance increased average issues resolved per hour by 15%. Results varied across workers; less-experienced workers benefited more.

Source

Brynjolfsson, Li and Raymond, Generative AI at Work, author manuscript revised November 2024.

Read the study (opens in a new tab)

Professional-writing tasks

40%

less time on assigned writing tasks.

Bounded writing assignments—not a measure of company-wide productivity, factual accuracy or payroll savings.

In an experiment involving 453 college-educated professionals, AI assistance reduced time on the assigned writing tasks by 40% and improved assessed output quality by 18%.

Source

Noy and Zhang, Experimental evidence on the productivity effects of generative artificial intelligence, Science, 2023.

Read the study (opens in a new tab) · Read MIT’s summary (opens in a new tab)

Independent research on other AI systems. Not Sabina performance claims, customer testimonials, endorsements or savings guarantees.

What keeps coming back to your desk?

Bring one recurring responsibility your team keeps chasing. Start with your business, then evaluate the work, the boundaries and the financial case.

See Sabina work

Start with a short assessment of your business.