Choose an AI sales workflow by finding a recurring job with available inputs, an output you can check and a person who will own failures. The best first candidate is the one your team can operate reliably. A long list of possible automations is useful only when it helps make that choice.
The original LinkedIn post listed eight systems from my work at Growth Cab. This article turns that catalog into a selection framework. Historical build-time and cost anecdotes are not a budget estimate for another team. Maintenance, integrations, model usage and review all belong in the decision.
in
“Here are 8 revenue systems to build while it's still free. I run all 8 at my agency. Lines of code written by me: zero. Each one took a single evening in Claude Code.”
Three Workflows Around the Customer
Call preparation turns account information into a brief before a meeting. It is a candidate when the sources are accessible and a seller can check the important facts. Its output is preparation for a conversation; the brief cannot establish the buyer's private priorities or substitute for discovery.
Follow-up preparation turns a call record into a proposed recap and next actions. It depends on a usable transcript, correct participant matching and clear commitments. Review effort rises when the conversation contains ambiguous dates, pricing or promises. Choose this workflow when your team already knows what a good recap contains.
Outbound research identifies evidence worth considering for an account. It needs a defined target list and a policy for missing or contradictory information. Keep the output as sourced findings until the next owner accepts it. Research quality and permission to contact someone are separate decisions.
Three Workflows for Visibility
A CRM dashboard summarizes recorded pipeline state. Before building it, check field definitions, update frequency and access. A beautiful summary of incomplete records can obscure the very problem it was supposed to expose. The acceptance check should compare a sample of displayed figures with their underlying records.
A KPI board shows a team which agreed measures require attention. Decide who owns each measure and what action a change should trigger. If two teams use different meanings for qualified opportunity, reconcile that definition before automating the display. More frequent refreshes will not resolve incompatible definitions.
An ROI calculator organizes assumptions for a commercial conversation. Distinguish customer inputs, documented historical figures and illustrative estimates. A calculation can be arithmetically correct while its assumptions are wrong. Require the reviewer to inspect both, and avoid presenting a scenario as a promised return.
Two Workflows in the Back Office
An invoice reconciliation assistant compares invoice and payment records and flags discrepancies. A missing match is a review item; it does not establish that a client failed to pay. Reference mismatches, partial payments and timing differences need an exception path. Keep financial actions outside the initial comparison task.
An inbox triager classifies incoming messages and prepares drafts. Choose explicit categories and preserve access to the original message. Ambiguous recipients, client complaints and new commitments need a named reviewer. The first useful outcome is a clearer review queue with accurate drafts.
Score the Candidates on Your Own Work
For each candidate, record frequency, time spent today, input completeness, review time, integration dependency and the consequence of a wrong result. Use the same definitions across candidates. Avoid adding these into a precise-looking score unless the team agrees how the factors should be weighted.
For example, a sourced call brief may be easier to pilot than a dashboard when the CRM is inconsistent. The opposite can be true when reporting data is clean and account research sources are inaccessible. These are illustrative choices. The selection should follow the actual bottleneck and evidence available in your company.
Test One Candidate Before Expanding
Define a small representative set with normal cases and exceptions. Run the workflow in a mode that produces reviewable outputs. Record accepted results, corrections, unresolved cases and total review effort. Include the time spent maintaining the workflow when comparing it with the manual process.
Assign an owner for failures and decide what happens when an input or integration changes. A successful demonstration does not establish unattended reliability. Expand after the team can identify a bad result, recover the task and explain which work was actually completed.
For the preparation workflow, see the five pre-call tasks and their limits.
For the follow-up workflow, see the post-call operating procedure.
For adaptive execution, see the sales agent loop.
