You know something is slowing the operation down
The problem is recurring, but the technical scope is not clean enough yet to quote a software build or integration.
Manufacturing Friction Assessment
Find the friction before you buy the fix.
Manufacturing problems often hide between systems, handoffs, people, and undocumented workarounds. Epyk follows one workflow end to end and shows where time, money, or knowledge is leaking, backed by evidence.
$3,500 fixed priceOne facility, one workflow, one onsite working day
OBSERVED
Facts witnessed onsite
CLIENT-PROVIDED
Inputs from people or systems
MODELED
Ranges with assumptions shown
Fixed-scope first step
For manufacturers with real friction and unclear technical scope.
The assessment is a commercial service, not a mandatory gateway. Prospects who already know the system, integration, or build they need can still use Epyk's normal scoping path.
See normal engagement structureThe workflow crosses people, systems, and handoffs
Queue time, duplicate entry, manual reconciliation, spreadsheet control, supervisor dependency, or tribal knowledge may be part of the issue.
You need a defensible starting point
The assessment separates observed facts, client-provided information, and modeled assumptions before recommending a path.
What it covers
One workflow domain, followed through the real operation.
Intake selects one bounded workflow domain so observation can stay practical and the final report can stay defensible.
Quote-to-order
Receiving-to-point-of-use
Job-release-to-shipment
Setup / machining / operator handoff
Inspection-to-disposition
Maintenance-event-to-resolution
Other bounded workflow
Common friction signals
HandoffsQueue timeOperator interruptionsDuplicate entrySpreadsheets acting as systems of recordPaper processesInformation searchesRevision lookupReworkScrapSetup frictionTribal knowledgeSupervisor dependencyDisconnected systemsManual reconciliationRepeated troubleshootingUnstructured notesInformation only one employee knows
Knowledge-retention discovery
Tribal knowledge is operational risk, even before software is discussed.
The assessment looks for knowledge that lives in memory, side notes, informal calls, and undocumented workarounds. Those risks can justify action on their own.
What do you have to remember that the system does not tell you?
Where do you leave notes for the next person?
What happens when the usual expert is absent?
Who gets called when this process goes wrong?
What does that person know that is not written down?
What do operators repeatedly ask someone else for help with?
When the same problem returns months later, how do you find the previous fix?
Which parts, machines, or jobs have undocumented special tricks?
Is anyone nearing retirement or transition whose knowledge would be difficult to replace?
Four-stage process
The assessment moves from fit, to observation, to evidence, to decision.
The process is intentionally narrow: a free intake, one onsite working day, off-site analysis, and a founder-led walkthrough.
Free Intake
15-20 minutes
Confirm that a real fixable workflow problem exists, select one workflow domain, establish scope, identify participants, identify data and access restrictions, and qualify whether the assessment is the right next step.
- Workflow domain selected
- Participants and access path identified
- Facility safety and evidence-capture constraints surfaced
- Assessment fit confirmed or normal scoping recommended
On-Site Observation
One working day
Epyk follows the real workflow with the people who actually perform it, preserving observed facts separately from assumptions.
- Handoffs, queue time, interruptions, duplicate entry, paper flow, information searches, rework, setup friction, system disconnects, and knowledge dependencies captured
- Evidence class recorded for important observations
- Permitted evidence-capture method followed
Off-Site Analysis
Draft targeted within 5 business days
Findings are organized by severity, confidence, effort, priority, evidence class, baseline, validation method, and recommended path.
- Current-state workflow map
- Findings overview and detailed material findings
- Quantified impact ranges where defensible
Founder-Led Walkthrough
Targeted within 5 business days after draft delivery
Epyk walks through the draft, records factual corrections without overwriting source evidence, and clarifies what should happen next.
- Correction disposition recorded
- Final remediation roadmap reviewed
- Separate scoping path opened only if the client asks Epyk to execute a recommendation
Engagement sequence
- 1.Free initial intake
- 2.Scope confirmation
- 3.One onsite observation day
- 4.Analysis and findings
- 5.Client-facing findings report
- 6.Prioritized remediation roadmap
- 7.Optional separately scoped implementation
Evidence methodology
Findings keep facts, assumptions, and confidence separate.
Every important finding is tied to an evidence class. Where possible, the report preserves source, timestamp, measurement method, provider, sample count, and observation period.
Findings involving workflows that did not occur during the onsite observation window are capped at Confidence 2 unless corroborated by system records, logs, timestamps, or other independent evidence.
OBSERVED
Directly witnessed or measured by Epyk during the assessment.
CLIENT-PROVIDED
Supplied by employees, management, or an existing system.
MODELED
Derived from assumptions or extrapolation. Modeled financial figures are presented as ranges, not false-precision point estimates.
Source
Timestamp
Measurement method
Person or system providing evidence
Sample count
Observation period
Finding model
Severity is calculated. Priority is judged.
The assessment does not use an old composite score. Impact, frequency, confidence, and effort stay visible so the client can see why a finding is prioritized.
Impact
1-5
Operational effect if the friction occurs.
Frequency
1-5
How often the friction occurs.
Severity
1-25
Calculated as Impact x Frequency.
Confidence
1-5
Reported separately from severity so weak evidence does not look stronger than it is.
Effort
1-5
Reported separately so priority can account for cost, disruption, and implementation difficulty.
Material finding definition
Material = Severity >= 9, or any safety, quality, customer, regulatory, or single-person-dependency exposure regardless of severity.
P1 - Act now
Escalate when safety, quality, customer, regulatory, or single-person knowledge dependency exposure exists, or when the evidence and severity justify immediate action.
P2 - Plan
Important operational friction with enough evidence to plan a controlled intervention.
P3 - Monitor
Potential issue where timing, confidence, or implementation effort makes monitoring or more evidence appropriate.
Watchlist
Not material now, but worth retaining as context for future validation.
Example finding patterns
Findings show evidence, severity, confidence, effort, and path.
These examples show the report structure, not customer results or promised savings.
F-01OBSERVED
Revision lookup interrupts setup decisions
- Severity
- 16
- Confidence
- 4
- Effort
- 2
- Priority
- P1 - Act now
- Path
- Existing tool/configuration change
F-02CLIENT-PROVIDED
Material status is reconciled manually from multiple records
- Severity
- 12
- Confidence
- 3
- Effort
- 3
- Priority
- P2 - Plan
- Path
- Integration/automation
F-03OBSERVED
One person knows recurring machine-specific setup exceptions
- Severity
- 8
- Confidence
- 4
- Effort
- 2
- Priority
- P1 - Act now
- Path
- $0 process fix
Client deliverable
The report creates a baseline for action and future validation.
For quantified findings, the assessment captures how the baseline was measured and how it should be re-measured after remediation. It does not invent automatic savings.
Executive Summary
Assessment objective, top findings, and immediate, near-term, and later actions.
Current-State Workflow Map
A concise map of the selected workflow domain and the information movement around it.
Findings Overview
Finding ID, finding, severity, confidence, effort, priority band, and recommended path.
Workflow Areas Reviewed With No Material Finding
Workflow areas reviewed where no material operational friction was identified.
Detailed Findings
Observed condition, evidence, likely root cause, operational effect, severity, confidence, effort, priority, recommendation, owner, validation needed, and timing.
Quantified Impact
Baseline, frequency, unit cost, annual exposure range, and evidence class. Modeled figures are ranges.
Correction and Revision Record
Correction requested, source/reason, disposition, reason for disposition, document ID, revision, date, change, and issued-by metadata. Client edits do not silently overwrite source evidence.
Remediation Roadmap
Prioritized actions across process, existing systems, automation, custom implementation, product fit, and monitor/no action paths.
Next-Step Discussion
This report is not an implementation quote. If Epyk is asked to execute a recommendation, that work is separately scoped and quoted after the findings are accepted.
Before / after validation
Baseline value
How measured
Measurement period
Who owns the number
Re-measure date
Post-remediation value using the retained measurement method
Valid remediation paths
$0 process fix
Existing tool/configuration change
Integration/automation
Custom Epyk implementation
Possible fit with an existing Epyk product
Monitor / no action
Scope boundaries
Focused enough to finish, explicit enough to trust.
The assessment evaluates workflow and information movement and does not require the collection or retention of drawings, controlled technical data, CUI, or other restricted content unless separately authorized and necessary.
Client understands this is not a cybersecurity audit, compliance certification, ERP implementation, or software build.
Do not submit controlled technical data, CUI, export-controlled drawings, or other restricted customer content through this form.
The assessment covers one facility and one workflow domain.
Additional facilities or workflow domains require separate scoping.
Observations are limited to the agreed assessment window.
Findings do not guarantee that every possible issue will be discovered.
Implementation work is not included in the $3,500 assessment.
Compliance, CMMC, NIST, CUI, ITAR, cybersecurity, legal, safety-certification, or regulatory-certification work is not implicitly included.
You already know exactly what you need and are ready for normal scoping.
You need a cybersecurity audit, compliance certification, ERP implementation, or software build.
The issue cannot be bounded to one facility and one workflow domain for the first assessment.
Pricing and timeline
$3,500 fixed price
A clear commercial entry point for manufacturers that need the problem understood before choosing a fix.
$3,500
Fixed price
50% to schedule
Final 50% due upon delivery of the draft assessment report
One facility
One workflow domain
One working day onsite
Off-site analysis afterward
Final founder-led walkthrough
Draft report targeted within 5 business days of the onsite assessment
Final walkthrough targeted within 5 business days after draft delivery, subject to client availability
Includes travel within 90 driving miles of Erie, Pennsylvania
Travel beyond that radius is quoted separately
FAQ
Common questions before intake.
The intake call confirms fit before anyone schedules the paid onsite assessment.
Is this required before every Epyk engagement?
No. If you already know exactly what you need, you can go directly into Epyk's normal scoping and engagement process. The assessment is for teams that know friction exists but do not yet have a clean technical definition of the problem.
Does this include implementation work?
No. The assessment produces evidence-backed findings and a remediation roadmap. Any implementation, integration, product deployment, or software build is separately scoped and quoted after the findings are accepted.
Will Epyk collect drawings, CUI, or export-controlled technical data?
The assessment evaluates workflow and information movement. It does not require collecting or retaining drawings, controlled technical data, CUI, or other restricted content unless separately authorized and necessary.
What happens if a workflow does not occur during the onsite day?
It can still be discussed, but confidence is limited unless system records, logs, timestamps, or other independent evidence corroborate the finding.
What if photography or devices are restricted?
The intake records approved evidence-capture methods such as handwritten logs, client-exported records, escorted screen review, or another approved method.
Does the report calculate automatic savings?
No. Quantified findings include baseline, method, measurement period, owner, and evidence class. Modeled financial exposure is shown as a range, not a false-precision point estimate.
Book an Assessment
Start with the free intake.
Submit enough context to choose the right first conversation. Do not upload or paste restricted technical content. If the assessment is not the right next step, Epyk will point you back to normal scoping instead.
Open the one-page overview