Loading
It breaks at every handover. Sales close a deal in one system; somebody sets up a project in another by reading the proposal; delivery log hours in a third; finance build the invoice from a project report.
Each step is a person retyping what another person already recorded. The errors are small — a dropped discount, a milestone in the wrong month, a rate from this year's price list rather than the one that was quoted — and they are only found when a customer queries the bill.
The enquiry lands as a lead in Flow with its source attached. It becomes a deal with contracted lines and rates. Winning it opens a project in Loop carrying those lines, so delivery works to what was sold.
Logged hours and completed milestones become billable lines, and Books issues the invoice priced at the rate the contract holds. The customer record is the same one throughout.
It will not remove the decisions. Whether to bill a disputed milestone, whether to absorb an overrun and whether to raise the invoice at all remain human calls, made visibly.
It also does not force one shape of work. Fixed-price, time-and-materials and retainer all run this path with different billing steps.
The quote and the invoice agree, because the invoice is assembled from the quote's own lines and the delivery record.
Margin is visible during the project rather than after it, so a job going wrong is a conversation in week three instead of a discovery at close.
No. The path degrades cleanly — Flow and Books alone give quote to invoice without the delivery record in between.
The contract in Flow, stamped when the quote was issued, not today's price list.
Yes, with the remainder staying on the schedule against the same milestone.
We will run it end to end on your own numbers in half an hour, and tell you honestly which parts Treepie does not improve.