We go through how your practice really runs: the suitability reports that eat the week, the annual reviews you have to evidence anyway, the notes written up days after the meeting. Then we tell you which of it is worth handing to AI, and in what order.
Most advisers know AI could take some of the writing off them. What they are missing is someone who will look at their own process and say which part to hand over first, and which part must never move.
Different client, same structure, same fifteen paragraphs of boilerplate around the four that actually matter. It takes hours, it happens every week, and none of it is the bit the client is paying you for.
There is a report writer, a meeting recorder, a research tool and a compliance checker, and each demo is convincing on its own. Nobody will tell you which of them your firm actually needs, or what would be a better use of the same money.
A general chatbot writes fluent advice-shaped prose with facts it invented and a rationale you never gave. On a file the FCA might read, that is not a time saving, it is a liability with good grammar.
None of that is a technology problem. It is a question of which job goes first, and that is the bit we do.
These come up in nearly every advice audit we run. Which of them lands in your plan, and in what order, depends on your client bank, whether you have paraplanning in house, and the back office you already work in.
Hours per report, most of it assembling structure and boilerplate around the few paragraphs that carry the actual advice.
Builds the first draft from the fact find, the research and the meeting note, in your own house template, with the sources attached.
The recommendation and the rationale. The adviser writes those and checks every line before it goes anywhere near a client.
Every ongoing client needs an evidenced review whether or not anything changed, and the packs get built by hand, late.
Assembles the valuation, the performance, the changes since last year and the agenda into your pack, ready for the adviser to shape.
The review conversation, and the judgement on whether anything should change.
Notes typed after the meeting from memory, sometimes days later, and they are your evidence.
Records with consent, drafts the note in your file format, and pulls out the actions and the things the client said mattered.
You read it before it goes on file. It is a compliance record, not a convenience.
The same questions asked in the first meeting and typed up afterwards, then chased for the documents that never arrive.
Collects the basics before the meeting, pre-fills the fact find, chases the letters of authority, and flags what looks inconsistent.
The conversation. What a client means by risk is not a form field.
Chasing providers for plan information, one call and one portal at a time, for weeks.
Tracks every outstanding request, chases on schedule, and tells you the moment a case has everything it needs.
Deciding whether the information received is good enough to advise on.
Market wobbles, and everyone wants the same reassurance written individually.
Drafts the update in your own voice, segments it by who is actually affected, and queues it for approval.
Approval, always. Anything a client might act on is signed off by an adviser.
Finding the document that proves you did the thing you know you did, months after the event.
Files as the case runs, runs your own file check against the checklist, and flags gaps while they can still be fixed.
The remediation, and the sign-off. A compliance judgement stays a human one.
Pulling the same comparison together by hand for cases that look very much like the last one.
Assembles the comparison against your own panel and criteria, with every figure traceable to where it came from.
The selection. Which is right for this client is advice and stays with the adviser.
Checking that every ongoing fee has a delivered service behind it, usually once a year and usually painfully.
Matches fees against reviews delivered, flags the clients who have paid and not been seen, and drafts the outreach.
What to do about it. That is a business decision.
Referrals, website enquiries and introducer leads arriving with no order to them.
Sorts by whether they are someone you can help, collects the basics, and books the first meeting.
Anything with vulnerability markers goes to an adviser unanswered, immediately.
Nobody starts with ten. A plan usually puts two live in the first month and leaves the rest ranked and waiting, so when you have the appetite for the next one you already know which it is.
Most of the job is joining up the systems you pay for rather than moving you off them. These are the ones we come across most in advice firms, and we have no affiliation with any of them.
Three steps. You do the talking on the first one, and nothing is committed until you have seen what we found.
No prep, no agenda to fill in. We ask the questions and you walk us through how your week actually runs: the jobs, the tools, the emails you send a dozen times a month.
Recorded and written up, so you never repeat yourself.
We work back through the call and map where your time actually goes. Then we find the automations that suit your tools, your team and your budget, ordered so the biggest time saving comes first.
Back with you within a week.
We walk you through the whole report, recommendation by recommendation, and you decide what to take on first. Most people have their first automation running within a week of that call.
The report is yours to keep either way.
The plan tells you what to build. The dashboard shows you what it is doing once it is built, so you can see what you are getting back without asking us.
Set up when the plan is delivered, at app.fewerhours.com under your business name. No shared login and nothing to install.
Every one we build reports the hours it saved and the work it handled, so the value is a number you can check rather than a promise we made.
The rest of the ranked list sits there waiting. When you have the appetite for the next one, you already know which it is.
This works best where a principal can still see the whole client bank. There are a few cases where it would waste your time, and those are worth saying out loud.
Fewer Hours exists because too many owners knew AI could help them somewhere and had no way of telling a good idea from a sales pitch. The plan is the boring part done properly: sitting with the real workflow and working out which jobs are worth handing over.
Whoever takes your call is the person who writes your plan. No account manager, no junior doing the analysis, and nobody trying to move you onto a retainer at the end of it.
Three steps, and you can stop after any of them. The first one is a conversation, and nothing about it commits you to the next.
A short chat about how your business runs. If there’s nothing here worth mapping, we’ll say so on the call.
The full job. We map the workflows, score every candidate, and hand over the ranked list and the 30-day plan.
If you’d rather we built the projects than just planned them, we’ll do the ones the audit put first. Anything from a quick win to a full agent build.
If there are fewer than five of you and admin takes about an hour a day, there probably isn’t enough here to be worth mapping, and we’ll say so. If you already know exactly which job you want automated, skip the audit and just ask us to build it. And if your processes only exist in your head, we’ll tell you to go and write them down first.
If yours is not here, ask on the call. It is twenty minutes about how the practice runs, not a pitch.
No. Advice is a regulated activity and the rationale is the part the FCA cares most about, so both stay with the adviser. What moves is the assembly around them: structure, boilerplate, figures, formatting, and the chasing that happens before any of it can start.
Several, and some are good. We do not sell one. The audit tells you whether your firm needs one at all, which would suit the way you actually write, and whether the same money would do more somewhere else in the practice. Quite often the report is not even the biggest win.
Every recommendation states what data it touches and where that data ends up. Keeping client data inside systems you already control is the default, and anything that would move personal or financial information somewhere new is flagged, with the alternative, before it reaches the plan.
It usually helps. Consumer Duty asks you to evidence ongoing service for every client paying an ongoing fee, and evidence is exactly the kind of work that suffers when people are busy. Automating the assembly makes the record more consistent. It does not make the judgement for you.
With consent, and the plan is explicit about how that consent is taken and where the recording lives. If you are not comfortable recording, there are versions of this that work from your own notes instead, and the plan says which.
Usually yes, because report writing does not get cheaper per adviser in a small firm, it just lands on fewer people. If you write a handful of cases a year, we will probably tell you to save your money.
The plan lands about two weeks after the call. Most firms have the first automation live within a week of that, because the first one is usually meeting notes or review pack assembly and neither needs anyone to change system.
Either. The plan is yours to take to anyone, including your network or your back office provider. If you would rather we set up the first two, that is a separate job and you decide after you have read the plan.
The call takes twenty minutes and it is about how the practice runs, not about software. The plan lands about two weeks later.