Make after-sales work easier to finish.
A proposed 30-day pilot for a hardware provider with products already in use and one recurring service problem.
Status Planned experience. Services and the connected Skyzai workspace are in development.
What the status labels meanOn this page
Choose the costly handover.
A fault may pass through customer support, diagnostics, a parts supplier and a repair contractor. Each handover can lose the reason, responsibility or next step.
Start with one repeated problem the provider cares enough to pay to resolve—not a new database for its own sake.
One provider. One problem. Thirty days.
A proposed test design, not a report of a completed pilot.
Freeze the baseline
Record current effort, elapsed time, context and unresolved cases.
Agree the work
Define the records, participants, tasks and permissions needed.
Deliver a bounded service
Coordinate diagnosis, handoffs or follow-up within the agreed scope.
Compare the result
Measure actual service effort and the agreed result. Seek paid continuation only if the work is worth it.
A repeated stop near a doorway.
In this illustrative case, a manufacturer supports cleaning robots at a customer site. Several stop near the same doorway. The customer wants reliable work; the cause is still open.
A technician shares only the qualification and availability needed. The team agrees diagnosis and handoffs. Logs support the pattern; foot traffic, scheduling and connectivity remain hypotheses. Simulation explores an option, then an authorized field test and independent comparison evaluate it.
No insurance coverage is assumed. An existing policy, warranty or maintenance agreement has its own meaning.
Name every party before starting.
Buyer and payer
The hardware provider or manufacturer would pay. The end customer is a separate party.
Site operator
Controls access and permits a bounded operational test within its mandate.
Service performer
The relevant diagnosis, parts or repair provider performs specialist work.
Menexus
Coordinates specifically agreed work, without acquiring manufacturing, clinical, insurance or site-operating authority.
Measure value, not a polished demonstration.
Correctness
Do participants see the right problem, evidence, responsibility and next step?
Effort
Measure coordination hours, manual curation and missing inputs.
Result
Use an agreed baseline and independent evidence; preserve alternative explanations.
Continuation
Would the provider pay to continue? A conversation or local test is not that evidence.
The provider pays for a defined pilot.
The proposed 30-day pilot would have a disclosed setup/service fee and transparent external costs. No numeric price, free trial, guaranteed saving or binding offer is made here.
Later recurring work needs its own scope, fee, remedy and exit. Product-as-a-service must separately say who owns and finances equipment; this pilot makes no financing commitment.
Is this the right first problem?
What kind of provider fits?
A small hardware provider with installed products, a recurring after-sales issue, rights-clear records and people who can approve bounded work.
What must be available?
A source owner, specific problem, sufficient lawful evidence, named performers and a baseline. Customer genetic, health, belief and passport records are not required.
When should we not start?
When ordinary search already solves it, no one owns the work, records cannot lawfully be used, a safety-critical change lacks appropriate review, or the result is only a nicer demo.
What is not included?
A CAD kernel, PLM replacement, autonomous physical control, machine consciousness claim, insurance sale or whole-company transformation.
A proposed pilot, not an open offer.
No pilot participant, service price or launch date is announced. This website is information only.
Discuss fit at yves@menexus.net with a short non-sensitive problem description. Do not send a file pile or personal records before scope and rights are agreed.