Tonette demo two with Victoria

CURRENT DECISIONRebalance the client service team before two contracts renew+ New decisionExcelPowerPointEmailAsk Tonette...

The decision Tonette thinks you should make now

Rebalance the client service team before two contracts renew NOW

Avoid 6 unnecessary hires, redeploy under-used placed personnel across two client sites, and put one agent seat on the client service desk, with no change to service levels.

QAR 1.2M

a year · 9 people redeployed · 2 hires instead of 8 · 1 agent seat

87%

confidence

28 Nov

approval deadline · last date this decision is cheap

High valueLow riskAct now

Workforce and business alignment · five questions

71%Economics aligned?
below the 80% the plan needs

QAR 640KPaying for unused capacity?
71% used · 2 sites idle

+2 → +8Workforce we need?
1.9M cost of doing nothing

QAR 1.2MValue to unlock?
49% captured by this decision

4%How far to push?
green · dashed · refused

ARE WE PAYING FOR UNUSED CAPACITY?

QAR 640K

client service 410K · placed personnel 230K · utilisation 71% vs 85% target · 2 sites with idle hours · 1 seat needed

Decision 01 →

Current plan (8 hires)

QAR 2.9M added cost · utilisation stays at 71%

Tonette recommendation (2 hires · 9 redeployed · 1 agent seat)

QAR 1.2M a year · utilisation to 84% · service level unchanged

Decision rehearsal

Change the goal. Watch the configuration move, and hear Tonette push back.

People cost saving goal

Pick a goal, and Tonette finds the configuration

Save 2%Save 4%Save 6%Cut 9%

This is the point Tonette recommends.

Net QAR 1.2M a year. Nine people redeployed, two hires instead of eight, one agent seat on the service desk. Every rule respected, no client contract touched.

NET VALUE A YEAR

1.2M

SERVICE RISK

Low

OTHER OPTIONS, BEST FIRST

Redeploy first, one agent seat on the service desk	1.2M · no contract touched	RECOMMENDED
Change the hiring route	0.4M · 60 days faster	COMBINE
Freeze hiring	0.5M net in 2021	REJECTED
Across the board cut	2.4M on paper	REJECTED · RULES

Organisation

Structure is something Tonette can optimise, read against ten years of your own record.

LOAD

3 of 14

team leads above the load norm · client desk at 2.1×

OWNERSHIP

units with no clear owner · placed personnel on two sites

LAYERS

chief executive to desk · groups like yours: 4 · do not flatten

RETURN

0.8×

2.1M delivered ÷ 2.6M spent changing structure 2016–26

AGENTS

3 live · 1 proposed · 4.7 FTE-equivalent · 200K a year · never headcount

PEOPLE + AGENTS · THE MIX BY UNIT · PEOPLE IN FTE, AGENTS IN SEATS, FTE-EQUIVALENT HOURS AND ALL-IN COST · NEVER ADDED TOGETHER

UNIT	PEOPLE	PEOPLE COST	AGENT SEATS	AGENT FTE-EQ	AGENT COST	MIX · PEOPLE / AGENT	OWNER · REVIEW LOAD
Client service desk	12	2.9M	1 proposed	2.1	90K	85% / 15% · decision 01	Head of service · 1,100 h a year
Payroll and HR operations	5	1.6M	2 live	1.7	70K	67% / 33% · measured	HR manager · 420 h
Recruitment	9	2.4M	1 live	0.9	40K	91% / 9% · measured	Recruitment lead · 180 h
Finance	4	1.3M	0	—	—	100% / 0% · 40% eligible · 2027 plan	—
Business development	6	2.2M	0	—	—	100% / 0% · 35% eligible · 2027 plan	—
Placed personnel (clients)	760	68.4M	0	—	—	100% / 0% · planning only · by client and unit	Account managers
Whole organisation	350 + 760	96.8M	4 · 1 proposed	4.7	200K	99.6% / 0.4% · back office	Chief operating officer owns the agent record

Compare · 31 similar services groups

Four things the comparison shows that your own data cannot.

TONETTE REGIONAL INDEX

How this organisation compares across the Gulf

Benchmarked against 31 comparable groups · refreshed each quarter · each organisation stays anonymous

55thOVERALL PERCENTILE

Cost per client servedlower is better

58th percentilebetter than 58% of groups

Utilisation of placed personnelhigher is better

38th percentilebetter than 38% of groups

Agent spend and usereturn on agent cost

71st percentilebetter than 71% of groups

Pay positionagainst the market

52nd percentilebetter than 52% of groups

Every organisation on Tonette makes the index harder to replicate. Nobody leaves with the data.

Learning

Every measured outcome changes what Tonette recommends next.

DID OUR PAST DECISIONS DELIVER?

89%

of predicted value · 2026

FORECAST ACCURACY

2.4%

12-month error

RULES

5 · 4 · 1

policy · learned · under review

COHORT UPDATES

pay movement · agent review share · retention

ACTION	PREDICTED	DELIVERED	RESULT	WHAT TONETTE LEARNED
Rebalance client service · Jun 2027	1.2M	—	measuring	Agent seat live, 9 redeployed, 2 hired
Redeploy across two sites · 2025	620K	580K	94%	Redeployment prior 1.0 → 0.95
Payroll agent seats · 2025	review 15% · errors 3/100	review 11% · errors 2/100	exceeded	Agent review share now a measured input
Retention bonus · 2024	leavers 22 → 16%	22 → 20%	weak	r-04: a bonus is not a retention action for a below-market role
Across the board cut · 2021	2.1M	0.5M net	24%	Cut rejected in every rehearsal since · rule r-02 strengthened

Learning changes inputs and rules, never the arithmetic. The same data always gives the same answer.

Where money leaks

QAR 640K a year is leaving quietly. Here is where.

WHERE	A YEAR	OWNER	NEXT DECISION
Idle hours on two client sites	230K	Account managers	Decision 01
Overtime on the service desk	180K	Head of service	Decision 01
Vacancies filled late	160K	Recruitment lead	Change the hiring route
Agent seats held, not used	70K	Chief operating officer	Release 1 seat
Total	640K		49% captured by decision 01

Evidence and rules

Every figure carries its lineage.

FIGURE

QAR 1.2M a year · decision 01

SOURCE	REFRESHED	STATUS
Timesheets, two client sites	31 days ago	verified
Payroll, October	6 days ago	verified
Client contracts and service levels	12 days ago	verified
Agent log, service desk	1 day ago	verified
Demand forecast, two renewals	14 days ago	1 assumption

POLICY RULES · YOURS

Service level stays at 98%	pass
Notice period 60 days	pass
No change to client-facing roles without the account manager	pass

LEARNED RULES · FROM YOUR RECORD

r-02 · across the board cuts deliver a quarter of the plan	applied
r-07 · redeployment holds when notice is over 45 days	applied
r-11 · agent review share, under review	review

Execution

A recommendation becomes an action only after a person approves it.

ACTION	OWNER	DUE	STATUS
Agent seat live on the service desk	Chief operating officer	1 Dec	done
Redeploy 9 placed staff across two sites	Head of service	15 Dec	on track · 6 of 9
Hire 2, client service	Recruitment lead	20 Jan	late · 6 weeks
Measure the outcome	Tonette	Jun 2027	scheduled

Late actions are flagged to the owner and to the person who approved the decision.

3 year plan

People, placed personnel and agents, three years out, with cost and margin beside them.

	2026	2027	2028	2029
Own staff	350	352	358	364
Placed personnel	760	820	880	950
Agent seats	4	7	10	12
People cost (QAR)	96.8M	103.1M	109.6M	117.2M
Margin	11.8%	12.6%	13.1%	13.4%
Lesson carried	—	redeploy before hiring	agent seats before desk hires	—

DEMAND LINE · PLACED PERSONNEL

Base caseTwo new clientsOne renewal lost

Early warning

Three signals are moving your cost this month.

RENEWAL AT RISK

Client site B

utilisation 64% · contract renews in 23 days · margin 9%

Open decision 01 →

UTILISATION FALLING

Client site D

82% to 74% in eight weeks · 3 placed staff idle on Fridays

Open a decision →

LIKELY TO LEAVE

3 senior consultants

pay 8% below market · no move in 3 years · 1.9M to replace

Open a decision →

Warnings are built from your own record and the comparison with similar groups. Each one names what changed, why it matters and the decision to open.

Data and connections

What Tonette needs, and what is connected today.

INFORMATION	SYSTEM	REFRESH	STATUS
People and their cost	HR system, payroll	monthly	connected
Placed personnel by client	Contracts, timesheets	weekly	connected
Structure and roles	HR system	monthly	connected
Volumes that drive revenue	Finance plan	quarterly	connected
Agent logs	4 agents	daily	3 of 4 · 1 missing

The list is agreed in writing before anything is shared. Unconnected agents are flagged, never guessed.

AI and reskilling

QAR 9.6M of payroll sits in roles exposed to agents. Most of it can move, not go.

EXPOSED PAYROLL

9.6M

4 roles · 31 people

CAN MOVE

71%

to work that is growing

RESKILL VS REPLACE

0.4×

cost of reskilling against replacing

PATHS OPEN

owner · date · result to measure

ROLE	PEOPLE	EXPOSURE	GROWING WORK	PATH	COST VS REPLACE	STATUS
Service desk agents	12	high · 62%	Client follow-up and renewals	6 reskilled · 0 replaced	180K vs 520K	Decision 01
Payroll administrators	5	high · 58%	Client reporting	2 reskilled · 0 replaced	60K vs 190K	measured
Recruitment coordinators	9	medium · 34%	Candidate relationships	3 reskilled · 0 replaced	90K vs 310K	2027 plan
Finance assistants	5	medium · 29%	Client pricing	not yet	—	review

Exposure comes from the work the agents already do in your own record, not from a general forecast.

DECISION LIFECYCLEFormingRehearsingReviewApprovedExecutingMeasuringLearned

Welcome

Press start, and Victoria will show you Tonette.

Ask Victoria a question

Victoria's narration and answers are recorded in advance. She does not make up answers.

See it with your own numbers

The founders would be glad to walk through one real decision from your organisation.

Write to the founderssupport@tonette.ai

Cost	QAR 90K a year	agent log, Oct · payroll, Oct
Work	2.1 FTE-equivalent	service desk log, 90 days
Hours released	about 2,000 a year	timesheets, 2 sites
Not known	effect on client satisfaction	no survey connected