Commerce · Revenue & Growth
Win More Ecommerce Deals with AI-Native Lead Qualification
For DTC founders, marketplace operators, growth teams, and ecommerce managers ready to move lead qualification from manual operation to instrumented AI-native delivery. Below: the workflow we ship, the operating model that keeps it improving, the governance posture, and the commercial envelope.
Projects from $15k · Refundable 7 days · Kickoff within 5 days
Early access: we work with a small first cohort. Engagements are scoped, priced, and shipped end-to-end by our team — not referred to third parties.
In one sentence
AI-native lead qualification for ecommerce — From Discovery baseline to production traffic in 8-12 weeks, with the operating model — eval harness, reviewer UI, audit log, calibration cadence — handed over as part of Build, not deferred to Run. Expected delta on speed to lead: +45 pts.
Key facts
- Industry
- Ecommerce
- Use case
- Lead Qualification
- Intent cluster
- Revenue & Growth
- Primary KPI
- speed to lead, MQL to SQL conversion, sales acceptance rate, and wasted meeting reduction
- Top benchmark
- CRM data quality (account completeness): 42% → 87% (+45 pts)
- Systems integrated
- Shopify, marketplaces, PIM
- Buyer
- DTC founders, marketplace operators, growth teams, and ecommerce managers
- Risk lens
- incorrect product claims, privacy, ad policy violations, inventory promises, and margin erosion
- Engagement timeline
- Discovery 2 weeks → Build 6 weeks → Run continuous
- Team size
- 1 senior delivery + founder oversight
- Discovery price
- $5k · 2-week sprint
- Build price
- $15k–$22k · 6-8 weeks
Primary outcome
separate serious buyers from noise faster
What we ship
AI qualification assistant, scoring rubric, routing rules, and CRM governance
KPIs we report on
speed to lead, MQL to SQL conversion, sales acceptance rate, and wasted meeting reduction
Why Ecommerce teams hire us for this
The real cost of lead qualification in ecommerce is rarely on the line item. It is in the time senior operators spend on routine cases that should have been pre-resolved, in the inconsistency between team members, and in the missed opportunities while the queue grows. AI-native delivery attacks all three at once by changing what the queue looks like before it reaches a human.
Recent industry benchmarks (Gartner, Salesforce Research) show ecommerce revenue teams spend 60-70% of their week on non-selling activities. AI-native delivery targets that non-selling block first.
Industry context: Mid-market and enterprise operators face the same fundamental tradeoff: AI must compress operational cycle time while remaining auditable and integrable with existing systems of record.
Benchmarks we hit
Reference benchmarks from production deployments of lead qualification in ecommerce-comparable contexts. Sources noted per row. Your actuals are measured against the baseline captured in Discovery.
| Metric | Industry baseline | AI-native typical | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|
CRM data quality (account completeness) Forrester B2B Insights: human-only CRM hygiene typically degrades within 6 months | 42% | 87% | +45 pts |
Pipeline conversion (SQL → opportunity) Lift attributed to better intent scoring + faster handoff from AI to AE | 18% | 27% | +50% |
Cost per qualified meeting Includes AI infra cost, SDR time, and overhead allocation | $420 | $95 | −77% |
Benchmarks are reference values from comparable engagements and authoritative sector benchmarks. Your engagement's baseline is captured during Discovery and actuals are reported weekly during Run against that baseline.
How we operate the workflow
The control surface we ship for lead qualification is built from the start to be operated by your team, not by us. Each prompt and rule has a named owner, each reviewer queue has an SLA, each metric has a dashboard. By the end of the first Run quarter, your operators can adjust thresholds and refresh sources without us in the loop — we stay available for the architecture-level decisions.
What we build inside the workflow
Concretely for ecommerce, we integrate with Shopify and marketplaces, build the retrieval and reasoning steps for lead qualification, and instrument speed to lead, MQL to SQL conversion, sales acceptance rate, and wasted meeting reduction. The Build deliverable is AI qualification assistant, scoring rubric, routing rules, and CRM governance, paired with a runbook your team can operate without us.
Reference architecture
4-layer AI-native workflow for revenue & growth
The reference architecture treats prompts and retrieval as code: version-controlled, evaluated on every change, deployed through CI. That posture is what makes lead qualification legible to engineering audit twelve months in.See the full architecture diagram for Revenue & Growth →
AI-native vs traditional approach
Side-by-side comparison of an AI-native engagement against the alternatives most ecommerce teams evaluate for lead qualification: time to production, pricing model, governance posture, operator throughput, unit cost, exit path.
| Dimension | Traditional (in-house build or BPO) | AI-native engagement (us) |
|---|---|---|
| Lead time to live deployment | 6-12 months | 6-10 weeks (thin slice) |
| Engagement billing | Time-and-materials or annual contract | Phased fixed-price (Discovery → Build → opt Run) |
| Audit posture | Manual logs, periodic review | Versioned prompts, audit logs, reviewer queues, attestations |
| Per-operator capacity | 1.0× (baseline) | +50% |
| Per-case cost | Industry baseline | Sub-dollar marginal cost on routine envelope |
| Exit path | Knowledge transfer takes 6+ months | Documented exit at every phase; artefacts in your repo |
Traditional process automation projects cost $80-200k+ with 6-12 month payback; AI-native engagements deliver thin-slice production in 6-8 weeks with measurable baseline-vs-actuals reporting.
Engagement scope & pricing
Lead Qualification delivery is structured as Discovery → Build → opt-in Run, each priced and scoped independently. No multi-quarter retainer commitments.
Revenue engagement
Three commercial envelopes, three deliverables. The next phase is scoped against the evidence the prior phase produced.
Phase 1 · Discovery
$5k
2-week sprint
Phase 2 · Build
$15k–$22k
6-8 weeks
Phase 3 · Run
$2k–$3k / mo
optional, hourly bank also available
~$25k–$45k typical year 1 (60% take the run option for ~6 months)
Outbound, growth, or revenue-ops workflow, integration with your CRM, weekly operating review during Run.
Discovery contains its own value (the workflow map, the baseline, the SoW). You can stop after Discovery and still own the artefacts. If you proceed, Build is fixed-scope and fixed-price.
The 4-phase delivery model
Phase 1 · Weeks 1–2
Discovery
We map the workflow, the systems, the decisions, and the baseline metrics. Output: a scoped statement of work.
Phase 2 · Weeks 2–4
Design
We translate the Discovery findings into an architecture: which data sources, which prompts, which review queues, which controls, which dashboards. The Build phase ships against this design.
Phase 3 · Weeks 4–8
Build
Build is paced by the evaluation harness: every prompt change must beat the incumbent on the labelled test set across enough metric slices to be promoted. The harness is what makes Build defensible.
Phase 4 · Weeks 8+
Run
Run cadence is calibrated to your operational reality: weekly metric review, bi-weekly prompt refresh, monthly calibration audit, quarterly architecture review. The Run phase compounds value as the labelled test set grows.
Interactive ROI calculator
Estimate your AI-native ROI for lead qualification
Reference inputs below are typical for ecommerce teams in the revenue cluster. Adjust them to match your situation.
Projected
Current monthly cost
$24,000
AI-native monthly cost
$7,920
Annual savings
$192,960
67% cost reduction · ~468 operator-hours freed / month
Governance and risk controls
For ecommerce teams operating under incorrect product claims, privacy, ad policy violations, inventory promises, and margin erosion, the governance stack we ship is opinionated: source allow-lists curated by your subject-matter expert, prompt versioning gated by your evaluation harness, reviewer queues staffed by your team, audit logs retained per your data policy. We bring the architecture; you bring the policy. The combination is what auditors recognize as defensible.
How we report ROI
The ROI metric that matters most for ecommerce leadership on lead qualification is not labor savings — it is opportunity capture. Faster speed to lead means more cases handled in the same window, more revenue, more compliance coverage, more customer trust. We measure both: the costs that drop and the throughput that scales.
Selected portfolio
Real builds — lead qualification in ecommerce and adjacent sectors
Below are engagements drawn from our active portfolio where the workflow rhymed with lead qualification in ecommerce or in adjacent contexts. Scope and stack are accurate; client identities are withheld under engagement NDAs.
Q3 2025
Specialist automotive software-optimization site — multi-brand chiptuning
Vehicle optimization specialist · DACH region
Marketing site for an automotive software-optimization specialist serving multiple regions: brand-by-brand service architecture, technical service descriptions accessible to non-technical buyers, lead capture per service, regional-catchment SEO foundation.
- Next.js + responsive
- Multi-brand IA
- Regional SEO
Q3 2025
Property marketplace — buy, rent, list across apartments, villas, commercial
Regional real-estate marketplace · GCC region
National real-estate marketplace covering apartments, villas, and commercial property: listing management for agencies and owners, search and filter optimised for local buyer intent, SEO foundation built for long-tail property queries, lead capture per listing with routing to the listing agent.
- Next.js + dynamic SEO routes
- Listing CMS
- Lead routing engine
Q1 2026
Premium bilingual corporate site + internal CRM
Multi-vertical consulting group · Europe
Corporate marketing site with animated bento-grid editorial, bilingual content architecture, and an internal CRM behind the scenes for lead handling. Designed to project a premium positioning aligned with enterprise buyers while keeping marketing-team ownership of the content layer.
- Next.js + animated bento grids
- Bilingual content layer
- Internal CRM integration
Client identities withheld under engagement NDAs. Sector, geography, and scope are accurate. Full case studies on request.
Common pitfall & mitigation
The failure mode we see most often on AI-native lead qualification engagements in ecommerce contexts.
Volume without quality
Teams scale outbound 5× but reply rate collapses because the AI sends generic pitches
Per-prospect context retrieval (intent data + recent triggers) before any draft. Reviewer queue on first 500 sends to calibrate.
Designing for the consumer scale of this category
What separates a consumer-grade lead qualification workflow from a B2B one in ecommerce is the asymmetry between routine and exceptional cases. The routine drives the unit economics; the exceptional drives the public perception. AI-native delivery lets you optimize both at once instead of trading them off.
On routine volume, the AI handles the work with consistent quality and sub-second turnaround. The throughput-per-operator improvement is what justifies the engagement in the CFO's spreadsheet. Concretely, for ecommerce, we typically see a 3-5x throughput lift on routine cases inside the first quarter of Run, with quality variance dropping by half. The operator team is not eliminated — it is redirected at the exceptional cases where its judgment compounds.
On exceptional cases, the architecture inverts: the AI's job is to surface the context, the policy clauses, the customer history, the prior similar cases — not to generate a confident answer. The operator's job is to apply judgment with the supporting evidence pre-assembled. The post-resolution review feeds the labelled test set so the next similar case is handled with deeper context. For ecommerce, this is what turns a one-off support frustration into a system improvement; for the operator, it is what turns reactive triage into deliberate craft.
The combined effect, visible in the dashboards by month three, is a workflow where routine work scales without degrading quality and exceptional work compounds operator knowledge instead of dissipating it. That dual outcome is the reason consumer-facing ecommerce teams adopt AI-native delivery on lead qualification — not because the AI is impressive, but because the asymmetry between the two case types finally has a workflow shaped to it.
Privacy and consent shape every consumer-facing lead qualification workflow in ecommerce more than the technology stack. We draft the consent model with your legal team during Build, not as an afterthought during launch — what data the workflow reads, what it stores, what it can use to personalise, what triggers explicit re-consent. The retrieval layer enforces the consent model at query time, so a customer who has not consented to personalisation gets the generic answer path rather than the personalised one. The architecture makes the consent boundary a runtime property, not a policy document.
Week-by-week shape of the Build phase
Week 1 — Discovery handover and labelled test set capture. We sit with the operator team running lead qualification today, watch a working day end to end, and capture 200+ real cases as the labelled test set. By Friday we have the workflow map, the system inventory (Shopify, marketplaces, and adjacent), the risk register, and the success metrics aligned with your KPI of speed to lead.
Week 2 — Architecture and integration scoping. We design the four-layer workflow (intake, context, action, review), confirm the retrieval shape, lock the prompt strategy direction, and produce the integration plan against Shopify. The output is the Build statement of work with a fixed price and a named deliverable per phase.
Week 3-4 — Build sprint 1: retrieval and intake. We stand up the retrieval index against your approved sources, build the intake classifier, instrument the audit log, and run the first eval cycle against the labelled test set. The thin slice is functional but not production-deployed.
Week 5-6 — Build sprint 2: action and review. We ship the action layer, build the reviewer queue UI, calibrate the confidence thresholds against the labelled test set, and onboard the first reviewer cohort. By end of week 6 the workflow is processing low-stakes production traffic with full audit logging.
The rest of the Build phase widens the production envelope case-by-case based on the reviewer feedback loop. By the end of Build, lead qualification for ecommerce is running on real traffic with the operating cadence already established.
A working example of this pattern
The recent build in our portfolio that maps cleanest to lead qualification in ecommerce is summarised below. Identity withheld under engagement NDA; sector and stack are accurate.
Premium marketing site for a specialist detailing workshop. Marketing site for a premium vehicle detailing workshop: ceramic coating, paint protection film, detailing, smart repair. Luxury automotive visual direction, structured per-service catalog with proof points, German-market SEO foundation, appointment-oriented CTAs throughout the funnel. (Premium vehicle care specialist · DACH region, Q1 2026.)
What carries over is the operating discipline — the labelled test set as foundational artefact, the weekly evaluation cadence, the audit log architecture, the reviewer-queue UX. What we re-scope is the integration surface specific to ecommerce (Shopify and the adjacent systems) and the prompt strategy tuned to the lead qualification vernacular in your category.
For US buyers
US compliance scaffolding for lead qualification in ecommerce (CCPA / CPRA, PCI DSS, FTC Act §5)
Ecommerce engagements touching US clients on lead qualification ship with the regulatory scaffolding your procurement, compliance, and legal teams expect. The framework that matters most for ecommerce is California Consumer Privacy Act / California Privacy Rights Act (CCPA / CPRA) — addressed below alongside the adjacent frames we encounter.
CCPA / CPRA
California Consumer Privacy Act / California Privacy Rights Act
Authority: California Privacy Protection Agency (CPPA)
- Scope
- California resident data rights (access, deletion, opt-out of sale/sharing), sensitive personal information, automated decision-making opt-out (proposed regs).
- How we ship inside it
- California-touching engagements ship with consumer-rights workflows: access request handling, deletion within 45 days, opt-out signals (GPC) honored at the retrieval layer. Automated-decision-making disclosures align with proposed CPPA regulations.
PCI DSS
Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard
Authority: PCI Security Standards Council
- Scope
- Cardholder data protection, network security, vulnerability management, access control, monitoring.
- How we ship inside it
- We do not store PAN. Card data is tokenised via your existing PCI-validated payment processor (Stripe, Adyen, Braintree). AI workflows touching cardholder environments stay outside the CDE boundary by design.
FTC Act §5
Federal Trade Commission Act, Section 5
Authority: U.S. Federal Trade Commission
- Scope
- Unfair or deceptive acts or practices, AI/algorithmic transparency, substantiation of marketing claims, recent FTC guidance on AI claims.
- How we ship inside it
- AI-generated marketing copy passes through a claims-substantiation reviewer queue before publication. We follow FTC guidance on AI/algorithmic transparency: no false claims about model capability, no deceptive personalisation, no covert AI-generated reviews.
NIST AI RMF
NIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI 100-1)
Authority: U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology
- Scope
- Voluntary framework: Govern, Map, Measure, Manage functions for AI system risk.
- How we ship inside it
- Every engagement maps to NIST AI RMF during Discovery. The control map produced becomes the artefact your internal audit and security teams use to defend the workflow.
Premium engagement page · hand-edited
The bespoke playbook for this combination
B2B / wholesale lead qualification for ecommerce — buyer-intent scoring, account fit, automated outreach drafts.
Architecture, end-to-end
Lead qualification AI for B2B-side of ecommerce (wholesale, B2B portals, dropship partner sourcing). Scores inbound leads on fit + intent, drafts personalised outreach, routes high-confidence to sales.
Lead ingest (forms, NetSuite SuiteCommerce, Shopify Plus B2B, Salesforce) → enrichment (Clearbit/ZoomInfo) → AI scoring on fit + intent + buying signals → sales rep queue with research brief pre-assembled.
Specific risks we engineer against
The four to six failure modes we have actually encountered on engagements that look like yours. Each has a documented mitigation in the Build SOW.
RiskOutbound damages domain reputation
MitigationDeliverability monitoring; per-day volume caps; warmup plan.
RiskBad enrichment data feeds wrong scoring
MitigationSource-confidence flags; periodic enrichment quality audit.
Reference deltas on B2B ecommerce lead qual
| Metric | Before | After | Window |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lead-to-meeting conversion | 3–6% | 9–14% | 60 days |
| Sales rep capacity (meetings/week) | Baseline | +40 to +70% | 90 days |
Reference from B2B wholesale and dropship-partner platforms.
Objections we hear most often
CAN-SPAM / TCPA exposure?+
Cadence + opt-out rules enforced at the outreach layer; opt-out signals honored within 1 business day.
Mini SOW
What the Build SOW looks like
Total fee
$20,000 Discovery + Build
Duration
8 weeks to thin-slice production
Week 1–2
Discovery: lead corpus + ICP + voice playbook.
Week 3–5
Scoring + enrichment + sales queue.
Week 6–8
Production rollout with rep adoption tracking.
Procurement FAQ
GDPR/CCPA?+
Both DPAs in place; GPC honored.
Real shipped systems
What our clients say
Below: attributions from active clients. Client identities are withheld in public form pending written approval; live references available to qualified procurement contacts on discovery call.
AI SaaS · DACH region
“They shipped the production version of our pricing brain in 6 weeks, including the billing layer and the onboarding flow. We had been bouncing between contractors for 4 months before.”
Founder, AI Pricing SaaS
Outcome: From 0 to live SaaS with paying customers in 6 weeks. Production billing live, AI onboarding flow shipped, 2 pricing tiers active.
Government-licensed legal services platform · GCC region
“A complete bilingual platform compliant with regulator requirements. Technical quality and delivery speed are outstanding.”
Founding team, regulated legal marketplace
Outcome: Ministry-of-Justice-licensed national legal marketplace, EN/AR bilingual, in 16 weeks. Directory + bookings + legal tools + emergency contacts.
Property management operator · GCC region
“We replaced spreadsheets and 4 disconnected tools with a single OA platform. 55 screens, 47 tables, a voting platform, and an internal portal — all on the same identity layer.”
CTO, multi-region property operator
Outcome: Centralised property operations across multiple owners associations. 14-week first release; 8-week follow-on for the staff portal; 6-week follow-on for e-voting.
Before / after
Concrete deltas from shipped engagements
Owners-association management workflows
Property management operator · GCC
Operator was scaling association count and could not maintain manual coordination. Replaced 4 fragmented tools with a single AI-augmented operational backbone.
Metric
Operational surface area
Before
Fragmented across spreadsheets + email + 4 SaaS tools
After (14 weeks Build phase)
Unified SaaS with 55 screens / 47 normalized tables / cross-app identity
Pricing strategy SaaS onboarding
AI pricing SaaS · DACH
Founder shipping AI-native pricing platform for early-stage SaaS. Discovery + Build delivered a working SaaS with subscription billing and an AI brain that learns from each customer.
Metric
Time-to-pricing for a new founder
Before
3–4 weeks of consultant time + spreadsheets
After (6 weeks total Build)
9-step structured AI workflow, completed in 30–45 minutes
Lawyer discovery and appointment booking
National legal marketplace · GCC
Regulated entity needed to launch the national reference platform for legal services. Delivered a Next.js 16 monorepo with bilingual content layer, PDF generation, and police directory.
Metric
Citizen access to certified legal services
Before
Fragmented across social media, no central directory, phone-only booking
After (16 weeks Discovery + Build)
Ministry-licensed bilingual EN/AR marketplace; multi-channel booking; legal tools; emergency hotline
Marketing site + booking funnel
Premium vehicle care specialist · DACH
Niche detailing workshop needed to project premium positioning matching their workmanship. AI-assisted copywriting + image art-direction compressed launch time.
Metric
Brand perception alignment
Before
Generic web presence — did not match workmanship quality
After (3 weeks concept-to-live (AI-augmented build))
Premium responsive site, German-market SEO foundation, appointment-oriented CTAs
For US companies
Start a US-friendly engagement
Discovery from $8,500–$12,000, Build from $35,000–$75,000, optional Run from $5k/mo. Fixed-price, milestone-billed, you own every artefact. Send a short brief and we reply within 5 business days. 11am–4pm ET overlap for live syncs.
USD pricing
Discovery $8,500–$12,000 · Build $35,000–$75,000
US-style commercial
MSA / SOW / mutual NDA standard. DPA with SCCs included.
Limited capacity
We onboard 3–5 new clients per quarter to protect delivery quality.
Build internally or work with us
Ecommerce teams that build successfully in-house tend to have an existing ML platform, a labelled data culture, and a product manager dedicated to the workflow. If any of those is missing, the project tends to stall at proof-of-concept. We replace those three dependencies with a scoped engagement and a senior delivery team.
What to ask us before signing
- Ask for a 30/60/90-day plan with named deliverables, not a vague phase description.
- Ask how we handle the long tail of edge cases the operator team has never encoded — escalation, calibration, capture.
- Ask for the model and provider strategy — single-model, multi-model, fallback paths, cost forecasting.
- Ask how the reviewer queue UX is designed and whether your operator team can shape it during Build.
- Ask for references from ecommerce-adjacent engagements — sector, scope, and outcome dimensions.
Recommended first project
The first project we recommend for ecommerce on lead qualification is rarely the one leadership names in the initial conversation. The named project is usually the most politically visible — which is also the riskiest place to ship a first AI-native workflow. We typically recommend the adjacent subflow with the cleanest baseline, the smallest blast radius, and the most repetitive operator work. That first project produces three artefacts that the visible project needs: a labelled test set the operator team has signed off on, a reference architecture against Shopify, and a credibility track record with the internal stakeholders who will be asked to support the second engagement. By the time we propose the second workflow — the visible one — the organisational gravity is on our side.
Frequently asked questions
How do you automate lead qualification in ecommerce with AI?+
We map the existing lead qualification workflow inside ecommerce, identify the high-volume, high-structure tasks, and build an AI agent that handles those tasks while routing low-confidence cases to a human reviewer. The build connects to your Shopify, marketplaces, PIM, runs against a labelled test set, and ships behind a reviewer queue before it sees production traffic. We then operate it, measure speed to lead, MQL to SQL conversion, sales acceptance rate, and wasted meeting reduction, and improve it weekly.
What does it cost to automate lead qualification for ecommerce teams?+
~$25k–$45k typical year 1 (60% take the run option for ~6 months). The structure: $5k Discovery (2-week sprint) → $15k–$22k Build (6-8 weeks) → optional $2k–$3k / mo Run. Outbound, growth, or revenue-ops workflow, integration with your CRM, weekly operating review during Run.
What is the best AI agent for lead qualification in ecommerce?+
Model selection on lead qualification for ecommerce happens against five criteria: quality on your labelled test set, cost per inference at your projected volume, latency budget for the user-facing path, provider reliability over 12-18 months, contractual data-handling posture. We bring the comparative methodology from prior engagements and run it during Build; the winning model is the one that survives all five, not the one that wins the demo.
How long does it take to deploy AI lead qualification for ecommerce?+
A thin-slice deployment in 2-week sprint after Discovery, with real ecommerce data and real reviewers. The full Build phase runs 6-8 weeks. By day 90, speed to lead, MQL to SQL conversion, sales acceptance rate, and wasted meeting reduction is instrumented, the team has a baseline, and leadership has the data needed to decide on expansion into adjacent ecommerce workflows.
What do we own, and what do you own?+
What we ship as code lives in your repository under your IAM. The prompts, the evaluation harness, the integration code, the reviewer UI, the infrastructure-as-code — all in your Git, not in our SaaS. We bring the engineering, the operating discipline, and the cadence; you bring the data, the policy, and the operator team. The handover is documented from day one of Build, not deferred to the end.
Where does revenue lift actually come from on this engagement?+
Four channels. Throughput per operator (same team, more cases). Conversion lift on the long tail of cases that previously fell through. Cycle-time compression on the decision path. Measurement consistency — the dashboard finally reflects what the operation is actually doing, which feeds the next round of optimisation. All four roll up to speed to lead, MQL to SQL conversion, sales acceptance rate, and wasted meeting reduction.
Do you train models on our data?+
No. We do not train any model on client data. Anthropic Zero-Data-Retention is enabled by default; OpenAI default-no-training is honoured. Prompts, retrieval indexes, audit logs, and integration data live in your cloud account under your IAM. At engagement end, every artefact transfers to your repository.
What if we want to exit the engagement?+
Discovery and Build are fixed-scope, so there is no mid-engagement exit cost. Run is month-to-month with 30-day notice. Every artefact (prompts, eval harness, integration code, dashboards, runbooks) is in your repository throughout the engagement, not behind our SaaS. There is no lock-in.
What does success look like 90 days after Build closes?+
speed to lead, MQL to SQL conversion, sales acceptance rate, and wasted meeting reduction measurably improved against the Discovery baseline. Your team is operating the workflow with the cadence we shipped during Build. The audit log is queryable. The reviewer queue is calibrated. The next workflow scope is informed by real production evidence rather than initial assumptions.
What support is included after the engagement ends?+
Optional Run retainer covers weekly cadence, prompt refresh, retrieval index updates, and reviewer-queue calibration. Architecture-level questions and breaking-change support are billed hourly outside of Run. Most engagements transition Run in-house at month 6-12; we stay available for architecture decisions for 12 months at no extra charge.
How does this integrate with Shopify and our existing stack?+
Discovery scopes the integration footprint explicitly. We integrate at the API layer; no replatforming required. The Build statement of work names exactly which systems are connected, which data flows are bidirectional, and what authentication patterns we use (SSO, service accounts, OAuth scopes). The integration code lives in your repository.
What does your team look like during an engagement?+
Discovery: 1 senior delivery lead + 1 PM, ~30 hours/week. Build: 1 senior delivery lead + 2-3 senior AI engineers, ~50-80 hours/week across the team. Run: 1 delivery owner + 1 engineer on weekly cadence. We do not use offshore staff augmentation. Every engineer touching your engagement is senior-level.
Sources we reference
The following sources inform the architecture, governance, and benchmarks we apply on ecommerce engagements. Cited here so you can verify and dig deeper.
- U.S. Census Ecommerce Data
- Build for the Future: AI Maturity Survey — BCG
- Generative AI in the Enterprise — Deloitte AI Institute
- B2B Buying Disconnect: Buying Decisions are Made Without Sellers — Forrester
- Generative AI Impact on Marketing & Sales — McKinsey
- State of Retail Report — National Retail Federation
- Retail Industry AI Adoption — Deloitte Retail Industry
- Google Search Central: helpful, reliable, people-first content
- Google Search Central: URL structure best practices
High-intent reads
Start the engagement
Start a Ecommerce engagement
Tell us about your workflow, the systems involved, and the KPI you want to move. We'll send a scoped statement of work within 5 business days.