What do they already have?
Scheduling and work-order tools, customer records, technician reports, photos, and an established billing process.
Business Orchestration · Field service
FieldLink
Less chasing. A clearer path from job to handoff.
Schedules, work orders, and completion reports already tell the story. FieldLink illustrates how DAT could use AI to bring that information into clear job briefs, an exception view, and approved summaries for billing and customers.
The idea at a glance
Where does work get frustrating?
Staff chase missing details, retype the same facts, and piece together what happened before the next person can act.
What could DAT make possible?
AI-assisted job briefs and completion summaries, a view of missing information, and a clear approval step using those existing outputs.
What becomes easier?
Technicians get useful context. Office staff review exceptions. Customers receive clearer summaries, with less repetitive work between each handoff.
See what those outputs could become.
This example brings existing job evidence into a reviewable summary. Scheduling, work orders, and billing remain in the tools the business already uses.
Concept screenshots with fictional data. These are visual demonstrations, not live applications.
Explore the details
Follow the proposed workflow, explore the assumptions, or see what a focused first step could involve.
How the orchestration could work
- 01
Start with existing outputs
Use approved schedule exports, work-order details, and customer records with stable job identifiers.
Keep the original systems authoritative.
- 02
Assemble the job brief
Use AI to draft a concise brief from those records. Show the source and flag missing or conflicting details for a person to resolve.
Give technicians context without another round of retyping.
- 03
Bring evidence together
Combine completion reports, notes, and photos already captured by the field team into a review view.
Spend less time reconstructing the visit.
- 04
Review the exceptions
Apply agreed completeness checks. A supervisor confirms the evidence and approves the handoff.
Keep decisions with the responsible person.
- 05
Prepare the next step
Produce an approved billing summary and customer update for the business’s existing processes and channels.
Make the outcome clear to the office and the customer.
The schedule and checklist illustrate a possible combined view. Assignment and completion controls would need an explicitly approved handoff to the existing tools; a first step can use their exports without enabling those controls. The pictured offline state is illustrative, not an implemented capability.
What DAT adds—and what stays in place
The systems you keep
Existing scheduling, work orders, customer records, and invoicing continue to own their records and decisions. A useful first step can begin with approved files or reports.
The experience DAT creates
A concise job brief, a focused exception view, and clear handoff summaries—designed around the staff and customers who need them.
Where AI helps
Draft briefs and summaries from approved source material. Keep facts traceable, hold uncertain information, and require review before release.
How information moves
Use agreed exports, reports, or existing APIs where appropriate. Define access, refresh timing, and ownership; any writeback or new data capture is a separate, explicit decision.
AI assistance is proposed as part of these concepts. Source checks, explicit rules, and human approval remain essential before information is acted on or sent.
Explore the ROI calculator and assumptions
Explore the ROI assumptions
Adjust the operating assumptions and costs to test the business case. The starting values are an example, not a forecast. Contribution means value after the relevant variable costs.
Illustrative scenario. Example costs are model inputs, not DAT prices or a quote. Include your internal change effort and other implementation costs before using the result.
Your scenario inputs
Illustrative year-one ROI
60%
Net benefit divided by total first-year cost
Monthly benefit$4,800
Year-one net benefit$21,600
Year-one cost$36,000
Simple payback5.5 months
| Measure | Modeled | 50% benefit |
|---|---|---|
| Annual benefit | $57,600 | $28,800 |
| Year-one cost | $36,000 | $36,000 |
| Net benefit | $21,600 | -$7,200 |
| ROI | 60% | -20% |
| Payback | 5.5 months | 20.0 months |
USD. Assumes the modeled benefit occurs in each of 12 months. Startup ramp, tax, financing, discounting, and additional internal costs are not modeled.
Starting benefit calculation
(120 - 40) paid overtime hours x $60 fully loaded overtime cost = $4,800/month
Year-one ROI = (12 × monthly benefit − initial cost − 12 × monthly cost) ÷ (initial cost + 12 × monthly cost).
Simple payback = initial cost ÷ (monthly benefit − monthly cost). No payback is shown when ongoing net benefit is zero or negative.
Assumptions behind the example
- Paid overtime falls by 80 hours per month at comparable workload and service quality.
- The $60 rate is the fully loaded cost actually avoided, not an additional premium added to another labor saving.
- The business actually eliminates the overtime expenditure; redeployed regular-shift time is reported as capacity, not cash.
- Do not also count the same hours as productivity savings, extra revenue, or avoided rework.
- All inputs are illustrative assumptions, not measured results, external benchmarks, DAT prices, or a quote.
- The comparison assumes the full modeled monthly benefit occurs in every one of 12 months; startup ramp is not modeled.
- Example cost includes initial implementation plus 12 recurring monthly charges; internal change effort and any additional costs require validation.
- Simple payback uses monthly benefit less the recurring monthly cost. It excludes financing, tax, discounting, and timing effects.
- Benefit attribution and the scope of variable costs must be validated with the customer before making an investment decision.
First steps, measures, and dependencies
A focused first step
- One service team, one recurring handoff, and agreed source outputs
- A job brief and completion-review prototype using fictional or approved sample data
- Human approval and a summary for the existing billing/customer process
- Baseline handling effort, overtime, completion quality, and repeat visits
Possibilities to validate later
- Additional job types or customer-summary templates
- More frequent refresh through approved existing interfaces
- Any writeback, new capture, or offline behavior only after scope and ownership are agreed
- AI-assisted exception summaries, evaluated against source facts
How to measure the result
- Paid overtime cost — Compare actual payroll overtime spending at equivalent job volume and complexity.
- Completion quality — Track first-visit completion and repeat visits; investigate changes in job mix.
- Administrative handoff time — Measure completion-to-review and review-to-invoice intervals without double-counting labor savings.
- Update reliability — Measure successful sync, failed submissions, and time to resolve exceptions.
The illustrative financial case assumes paid overtime falls from 120 to 40 hours per month. Eighty avoided hours at a $60 fully loaded overtime rate create $4,800 in monthly cash benefit only if the paid spend is actually eliminated. Time saved inside normal shifts is capacity, not automatically a cash saving, and is excluded from this ROI. Validate the baseline across comparable workloads, confirm that fewer hours do not come from fewer jobs, and monitor completion quality and repeat visits. The proposed application does not guarantee the reduction; dispatch practice, job readiness, adoption, and payroll evidence determine whether the benefit is real.
What needs to be true
- Reliable source records — Agree identifiers, record ownership, completeness checks, and refresh timing. Make stale or conflicting information visible.
- Approved use of data — Confirm access, permitted AI processing, retention, and who can review or release each output.
- Evidence of value — Saved time is not automatically cash saved. Validate comparable workloads, payroll evidence, service quality, and adoption.
What could your existing information make possible?
Bring us a repetitive task and the outputs your team already uses. We can explore a focused way to turn them into a more useful experience.