Strategy variations

Four paths. Different businesses.

Choose the strategy by the buyer’s bottleneck, funding priority and operational readiness. The four routes are alternatives to evaluate, not a bundle of simultaneous claims.

The operating loop

01
Own the productRepeatable receptionist package
02
Work with a principalVerified approved-vendor arrangement
03
Own the transactionConnected sales, operations and finance
04
Redesign the workflowSecure casework with measurable throughput

Recommended decision

Start the cohort; qualify one ERP client; use a verified partner when subsidy is essential.

Choose by the constraint

Dimension	Cohort	Partner	Operations ERP	Secure transformation
Primary objective	Repeatable product proof	Immediate verified package route	Reliable quote–job–invoice	Complete-file throughput
Funding dependency	None for launch; future own listing	Exact approved principal/package	Gap test if other vendor	Activity-specific assessment
Control	High product control	Constrained by principal	Platform and transaction ownership	Process and data boundaries
Main risk	Support exceeds price	Margin/control lost to partner	Migration and scope complexity	Sensitive data and weak realisation
Repeatability	High if bounded	High if authorised package	Medium within one service vertical	Low until case patterns standardise

Explore each strategy

Sell one supported answers-and-request workflow. WhatsApp provides the channel; signed knowledge provides facts; one CRM/inbox owns the next action; Jarvis gives an exception brief; Academy/GRC provide operating discipline.

Target appointment/service SMEs with repeated questions and sufficient volume.
Standardise fields, approvals, support limits, reporting and rollout; isolate tenant facts.
Use direct sales/EIS review while building your own approval evidence.
Validate the documented booking-request capture on the actual client tenant; complete required intake and acknowledged operator handover before claiming client production readiness.

Use a genuine approved vendor’s exact solution when subsidy is a decisive buyer requirement. CyberG7 can provide only authorised delivery work or separately contracted services that fit the arrangement.

Verify the exact listing, package, principal and current commercial authorisation.
Client quote, application, deliverables and invoice must match the approved arrangement.
Do not relabel Jarvis as the approved solution or borrow a partner’s approval.
Keep website, AEO and custom integrations outside the claim unless actually included and accepted.

Diagnose the transaction first: who reconstructs scope, work completion and billable details? Select one ERP owning sales, service operations and finance. Jarvis assists; WhatsApp is the channel.

Compare existing systems and suitable approved ERP packages before commissioning a new build.
Use the other-vendor route only where required-function gaps are evidenced.
Define acceptance as finance issuing the correct invoice from completed job evidence without reconstructing it from chats.
Avoid inventing licence value around free software; quote actual entitlements/services.

For a consultancy, connect public enquiries, secure upload, case records, checklist and consultant review. Jarvis coordinates drafts; qualified people retain personalised advice and submission decisions.

Select broader transformation only when the cross-system bottleneck is material and measured.
Keep identity documents in a controlled workspace; verify tenant isolation, purposes and processing chain.
Begin with a smaller internal drafting/checklist scope when the full build fails economics.
Treat EIS as a tax classification of actual AI expenses, not a cash subsidy.

Three iterations of the same sales decision

Iteration	What you propose	What changes the decision
Lean	Approved answers, request capture, one queue and weekly review	Does the client have enough recurring workload and a person to act?
Connected	Calendar or job/invoice integration with exact approvals	Is record reconstruction the next measured bottleneck?
Portfolio expansion	AEO/content, voice, secure workspace, analytics or multi-site control	Does the new module improve an evidenced outcome enough to fund its continuing cost?

Add the next service because the client has a new bottleneck. A larger product list, extra agents or unused domains do not strengthen a grant application.

Stage the portfolio for a small agency

Period	Commercial work	Delivery work	Funding work
Days 1–14	Five targeted owner interviews; choose one repeatable vertical	Validate documented request capture; close acknowledgement, logging and client production-mode gaps	Check applicant/partner eligibility and existing approved options.
Days 15–45	One paid pilot under an explicit funding decision	Shadow rollout and outcome measurement; second tenant only after first operating gate	Prepare ERP comparison and proposal before funded commencement.
Days 46–90	Three paid pilots; two renewal/expansion decisions	Standardise the successful package; measure support margin	One complete ERP application candidate; no invented approval deadline.
Months 4–9+	Build five current same-product references	Six-month usage/productivity proof and security/functional checklist	Submit own pre-approval only when ready; illustrative completion later.

Limit concurrent custom implementations to what the named delivery team can support. One standard cohort plus one separately staffed ERP opportunity is a credible initial allocation; four custom builds at once is not assumed here.

Funding does not repair the operating case

A grant can reduce first-year outlay after reimbursement. Renewal still needs to be worth its price. A tax deduction depends on qualifying costs and actual tax usability. Run the no-funding scenario first, then use funding to compare affordability rather than to disguise negative recurring benefit.

Source: Integrated ERP activity ↗ · EDGE FAQ ↗ · IRAS EIS ↗