Lunnoa Reports, a tour of the building blocks
Executive summary
This is a public, read-only demo of Lunnoa Reports: the tool Lunnoa uses to turn workshop findings into a structured client deliverable. Every number on this page is illustrative, standing in for what a real engagement produces.
At a glance
Automation maturity
Illustrative maturity: current vs. 6-month target
Sample scores on a 1 (ad hoc) to 5 (optimised) scale, shown here to demonstrate the chart.
Every section of this demo report uses a real component from the Lunnoa Reports vocabulary. Browse the sidebar for current state findings, a use case portfolio, and a delivery roadmap.
Current state
A typical workshop report opens each section with a one-paragraph lead, then supports it with findings, direct quotes, and callouts. This section demonstrates that pattern with illustrative content.
Manual handoffs multiply the time a routine task takes
In a typical process discovery workshop, a single request can pass through four or five inboxes before it is resolved. Each handover is a manual email or shared inbox forward, and each one adds a delay that nobody owns.
“We do the same five-step approval on every request. The five steps make sense. Doing them all by hand, five hundred times a month, does not.
”
The data needed to automate a process already exists, just not in one place
Workshops repeatedly surface the same pattern: the fields needed for a decision are already captured somewhere in the stack. The gap is integration and ownership, not data capture.
“Nobody signed off on this process existing this way. It grew one exception at a time.
”
“Every team has its own spreadsheet version of the truth. We reconcile three of them every Friday.
”
- Request arrives by email, forwarded to a shared inbox.
- A coordinator opens the request and retypes key fields into the system of record.
- A second person checks the entry before it is actioned.
- A Lunnoa agent receives the request and extracts the key fields automatically.
- Matching and validation run without manual re-keying.
- Exceptions route to a queue for a person to review, not the whole volume.
Workshop participants
Use cases
Workshop findings typically resolve into a scored portfolio of candidate use cases. This section shows the matrix, card grid, and before/after comparison chart used to present that portfolio, with illustrative data.
Twelve use cases scored on effort and impact (illustrative)
Recommended first wave
Supplier invoice intake
- Impact
- ~220 hrs / month (illustrative)
- Effort
- M
- TTV
- 6 weeks
Order acknowledgements
- Impact
- ~90 hrs / month (illustrative)
- Effort
- S
- TTV
- 4 weeks
Projected impact
Manual hours per month, before vs. projected after wave 1 (illustrative)
Roadmap
The closing section of a workshop report sequences the recommended work into phases and states the concrete next steps. This section demonstrates the timeline, recommendation, and table components with illustrative data.
Wave 1, illustrative 12-week delivery
Phase 1, Foundation
Weeks 1-3- Systems access confirmed
- Lunnoa platform deployed
Phase 2, Build the first flows
Weeks 4-8- HR triage live week 5
- Invoice intake live week 8
Phase 3, Adopt and measure
Weeks 9-12- Hours-saved dashboard live
- Wave 2 backlog scoped
Commit to a 12-week first wave covering invoice intake and order acknowledgements
These two use cases share a deployment pattern and, in this illustrative scenario, would together cover the largest concentration of manual hours observed in the workshop.
Stand up a shared hours-saved dashboard before wave 2 kicks off
Measuring wave 1 honestly is what earns the mandate for wave 2. Track hours saved per use case from week one, not just at the review.
Success metrics
| Workstream | Manual hrs / week (before) | Manual hrs / week (after) |
|---|---|---|
| Invoice intake | 70 | 15 |
| Order acknowledgements | 28 | 5 |
| HR ticket triage | 22 | 9 |