Most CRMs are half-empty, half-wrong, and half-trusted, because keeping them current is manual work that always loses to actual selling. We fix the data, connect the systems your CRM can't reach on its own, and automate the updating so the record is right without anyone maintaining it.
Most builds live in 2–4 weeks · HubSpot · Salesforce · Zoho · Pipedrive
A forecast built on this is a guess.
A forecast built on this is a forecast.
Trusted by teams in the US, UK, and India
Siddhraj
Unoloft
Kofeko
3nStar
Veda
Cerata
Shubham
Consultup IndiaSiddhrajUnoloftKofeko3nStarVedaCerataShubhamConsultup IndiaLead routing on logic the native builder can't express, multi-object updates, and custom-coded actions where a standard workflow step runs out of road.
Deduplication rules, field normalisation, and enrichment on record creation, so a new contact arrives complete rather than as a name and an email.
Your billing platform, your product database, your operational tools. Custom objects and properties designed properly rather than bolted on as text fields nobody fills.
Pipeline and attribution reporting built on data that's complete, with the gaps that make forecasts unreliable closed at the source.
HubSpot's own AI agents (Breeze) cover a lot of standard ground, and some of them consume credits, so the running cost is usage-based rather than fixed. We'll tell you where Breeze is the cheaper answer.
A form submission lands in an inbox. Someone copies it into the CRM when they get round to it, or doesn't. The company field says whatever the prospect typed. Nobody's checked whether this contact already exists.
Created on submission, enriched with company data, checked against existing records, scored, assigned by territory and workload, and acknowledged within a minute.
Two emails, a WhatsApp exchange, and a call. None of it logged, because logging it means switching tabs and typing a summary. The record still shows Monday's status.
Email and calendar activity logged automatically. The WhatsApp thread attached to the contact. A call summary written and filed. The record reflects what actually happened without anyone maintaining it.
Half the deals show stages that are days or weeks stale, so the review becomes a verbal update meeting and the CRM report is background decoration. The forecast is somebody's instinct with a number attached.
Stages move when the underlying work moves. Stalled deals surface themselves. The review starts from the data instead of correcting it.
Nobody resists using a CRM because they don't understand it. They resist because it asks them to type things a system could already know.
Almost every CRM automation project we're brought into starts as a request for workflows and turns out to be a data problem wearing a workflow costume.
Duplicates mean your automation fires twice, your reporting double-counts, and two reps call the same person in the same week.
Missing fields mean routing rules silently fall through to a default nobody watches, and segmentation quietly excludes a chunk of your list.
Stale records mean automation acts on a state that stopped being true weeks ago, chasing a deal that closed, nurturing a customer who churned.
Inconsistent values mean “United Kingdom,” “UK,” and “U.K.” are three territories as far as your routing rule is concerned.
So the first thing we do is measure it: duplicate rate, field completeness on the fields that actually drive decisions, record staleness, and value consistency. You get that assessment whether or not you hire us, and it usually reframes the conversation. Then we clean, then we enforce, validation and automated enrichment so the data can't degrade back, and only then do we automate.
It's a less exciting first month than "we built you twelve workflows," and it's the difference between automation that compounds and automation that quietly does the wrong thing at scale.
We measure the state of your data and map what your team currently updates by hand. You get the numbers, duplicate rate, completeness on the fields that matter, how stale the average record is, whether or not you hire us.
A written list of what gets cleaned, what gets connected, and what gets automated, with a price and a date. Approved before anything is built.
Deduplication and normalisation first, run on a sandbox copy so you see the result before it touches production. Then integrations, then automation, then testing on real records.
Switched on with alerting on failed syncs and a monthly data-quality report, so degradation is visible rather than discovered six months later. The monthly plan covers fixes, tuning, and new automation as your process changes.
Most CRM problems are integration problems. The record is wrong because the truth lives somewhere the CRM can't see.
Using something else? If it has an API, we can connect it. If it doesn't, and some older industry-specific systems genuinely don't, we'll tell you before you commit and propose a scheduled file exchange instead of pretending otherwise.
If reps aren't updating the CRM, more automation on top doesn't fix that, it just widens the gap between what the system says and what's true. The fix is removing the manual entry, not adding workflows that assume it happened.
A Flow with forty elements or a chain of workflows built by someone who's left is a system your team is afraid to change. We document what we build and design it to be modified by someone who wasn't us.
Plenty of what teams ask us to build is sitting unused in a tier they're already paying for. We check that first, and we'll tell you when the answer is “turn on the feature you have” rather than “hire us.”
A one-off cleanup degrades back within a year without validation and enrichment holding the line. Cleanup without enforcement is a temporary result at a permanent price.
Worth saying plainly, because the alternative is you discovering it after signing.
Your requirement fits the native builder, your data is in decent shape, and you have someone in-house who'll own it. HubSpot, Salesforce, Zoho, and Pipedrive all ship capable automation, and all now ship AI agents, Breeze, Agentforce, Zia, that handle a lot of standard sales and support tasks well. If that's your situation, hiring us would be paying for something you're already licensed for.
The logic exceeds what the builder can express, the data underneath is unreliable, you need to connect a system your CRM has no native integration with, previous automation has become too tangled to safely change, or you have nobody in-house who owns any of it. Native AI agents are often usage-billed or gated behind a higher tier, so "it's included" sometimes isn't, worth checking your actual plan before assuming.
Honest answer: the first thing we do on a call is ask what tier you're on and what's already switched on. We've told people to go and use a feature they were already paying for more than once. It's a bad way to close that deal and a good way to be the first call when the next one comes up.
If the real problem is elsewhere: data moving between tools is workflow automation. Mail piling up is email and inbox automation. Conversations that need judgement rather than rules are AI agent development.
And if the honest answer is that no CRM on the market fits how your business actually works, that's a different page entirely: CRM development. This page is for "why doesn't our CRM work properly". That one is for "should we build our own", and it's a much bigger commitment.
HubSpot, Salesforce, Zoho CRM, and Pipedrive. If yours has an API, we can generally work with it, and if we haven't built on it before, we'll say so rather than learning on your budget.
Often, yes, and we check that first. Native builders handle standard automation well, and all the major platforms now ship AI agents too. We're worth hiring when the logic exceeds what the builder can express, the data underneath is unreliable, or you need to connect something your CRM has no native integration with.
No, that's usually the first thing we do. We measure duplicate rate, field completeness, and record staleness, then clean and put validation in place so it doesn't degrade back. Automating on top of unreliable data is how projects fail expensively.
Most of it. Anything a system can know, email and calendar activity, payment status, order state, stage changes tied to real events, should be captured automatically. What genuinely needs a human's judgement, like qualification notes, stays with the human.
Data cleanup is typically two weeks. An automation build is three to four. Doing both usually runs four to six, depending on how many systems we're connecting.
Yes, and the cleanup matters more here than anywhere else, a migration is the one moment you can avoid carrying a decade of duplicates into a new system. Migrating dirty data is just relocating the problem.
Cleanup and testing happen in a sandbox or a copy, and production changes are made through your CRM's own API. We don't need to export your customer database to a third-party platform, and we work under NDA with access limited to the engineers on your project.
Integrations ship with alerting on failed syncs, so we usually know before you do. Fixes to anything we built are covered by the monthly plan.
You do. It runs inside your own CRM instance and your own accounts, with documentation handed over. If you stop working with us, everything keeps running and your team or another consultant can maintain it.
We're in Ahmedabad, India, and stay available for video calls in your US and UK working hours, not ours. A written update every Friday plus a short Loom walkthrough.
See what the monthly plan actually covers, the tuning and monitoring work that keeps a sync from quietly drifting.
Book a 30-minute call. We'll audit your duplicate rate, field completeness, and how stale the average record is, and tell you what's worth cleaning, connecting, or automating. If the answer is a feature you're already paying for, we'll tell you that instead.
