The headline case study. IgniteAI Solutions, our own business
We ran the method on ourselves first
In January 2026 the business ran at a loss. In February, Claude went live across the whole business, on the same operating system we sell to clients. Ten months on, revenue this year is about 9 times the whole of 2025, read from Xero. Invoicing in the second quarter was four times the first, July fell 78% when a large client left, and October was a record. 28 scheduled jobs now run the business day, and the work logged against a rate card comes to about 51 hours a week.
~9×
Revenue this year vs all of 2025
+299%
Invoicing, Q2 on Q1
24
New clients, Feb to mid-Oct
~51 hrs
Saved a week, modelled
28
Scheduled jobs running
The Challenge
An advisory selling AI adoption had the same constraint as its clients. One person carrying discovery, delivery, sales and the back office, with nothing left over for growth.
The Intervention
Built the operating system we sell to clients, on our own business: about 55 skills, 28 scheduled jobs, a knowledge base of 1,597 entries, and an advisory board of Claude seats. Claude drafts and never sends.
The Result
- • ~9× Revenue This Year vs 2025
- • 317 Pieces of Work Logged in Seven Weeks
- • 28 Scheduled Jobs Running
Revenue read from Xero for the UK company, 1 January to 21 October 2026 against calendar 2025, corrected for a bank refund posted twice to sales, before year-end adjustments. Quarterly invoicing from the business ledger, both companies. Hours modelled against a rate card since 31 August. Correlation rather than a controlled test, and the full study says so.