AI explained
AI agents vs traditional automation
Different approaches to getting work done, with different strengths and responsibilities.
A fixed route versus a choice of actions
Traditional automation follows a defined sequence: when a form arrives, validate its fields, create a record and notify someone. An agent interprets a goal and may choose from available tools to reach it. That flexibility is useful when requests vary, but it introduces uncertainty.
Use the simplest reliable approach
If the inputs and rules are predictable, a fixed workflow is often easier to test and maintain. An assistant becomes more interesting when people need to ask varied questions, compare documents or prepare work from unstructured information.
Permissions are part of the design
Reading a document and changing a customer record carry different consequences. An assistant should have only the access it needs. Define what it may read, what it may draft and which actions need approval. Keep those limits in code and access controls, not just in a written instruction.
Plan for the uncertain answer
An assistant should be able to say it cannot find enough information. Test misleading documents, conflicting sources and requests outside its role. A confident answer is not evidence of a correct answer.
They can work together
A practical design might use an agent to interpret a request, then pass a validated result to a conventional workflow. The person reviewing it sees the source, the proposed action and the consequence before approving.
A useful next step
Find one workflow worth improving.
Our short assessment can help you turn these ideas into a practical starting point for your business.
Explore your opportunities