Professional services
Proto for professional services
Keep the agreement, the work performed, and the next client conversation connected.
Engagement context is spread across the work
A project manager may have the latest delivery plan, the account owner the client’s newest request, and the signed statement of work a different set of assumptions. Preparing for a client review means finding these differences and deciding which deserve a conversation.
Proto can help assemble this context from Word documents, PDFs, spreadsheets, presentation files, ERP•AI records, and web applications in its browser. A useful task produces a review document with sources and open questions. It should not turn an informal request into a contractual commitment or confuse a draft deliverable with client acceptance.
Prepare an engagement review
Provide the current statement of work, approved change documents, delivery notes, and relevant time or expense exports. State which versions govern the review and the reporting cutoff. Ask for separate sections on committed work, recorded progress, unresolved dependencies, and decisions needed from the client.
An illustrative brief:
Prepare the next engagement review from these documents. Map each deliverable to the agreed scope and the available progress evidence. Identify requests whose scope status is unclear. Draft an agenda and a decision log. Quote no completion date unless the source supports it, and do not send the review to the client.
The resulting artifact can be a document for internal preparation or a slide deck for review. Check the facts before using it in a client meeting, particularly commitments, dates, charges, and acceptance status.
Preserve the differences that matter
| Evidence | What it establishes | What still needs confirmation |
|---|---|---|
| Signed scope document | The terms and deliverables stated in that version | Whether later approved changes apply |
| Delivery note | Work reported by the delivery team | Whether the client has reviewed or accepted it |
| Time export | Entries recorded against a project | Whether their classification and billing treatment are correct |
| Client request | A stated need or proposed change | Whether the change is agreed, funded, and scheduled |
Ask Proto to maintain those distinctions in its output. A request recorded in email should appear as a request until the supporting approval is found. Missing evidence should become an open question with an owner, rather than a confident summary.
Make handovers useful
For an incoming engagement lead, ask for a concise handover with the current scope, stakeholder roles, open commitments, outstanding decisions, and links or references to source documents. Prioritize what the new owner needs to verify in the first conversation. A large archive summary is less useful than a clear explanation of where the relationship stands.
Save the handover structure as a skill after the team reviews it. Reuse the method while supplying current engagement-specific inputs for each run. Proto’s local memory should not be treated as an organization-wide knowledge base or a substitute for the firm’s document controls.
Respect the client’s information boundaries
Proto stores files, sessions, and memory on your computer, while task context is sent to the selected AI model. Work in ERP•AI also saves the conversation to the app’s history. Review the data-flow explanation and your permitted model arrangement before using confidential client material.
Start with an internal or appropriately cleared engagement. Judge the result on traceability, accurate scope distinctions, and the quality of unresolved questions. Expand only after the engagement owner is comfortable using the output as preparation for real decisions.