EidralEngineering Engine
Chapter 02

The audit: we learn how the work actually moves

3 weeks on site with the engineering team. Process owners get shadowed rather than surveyed, because the shadow spreadsheet and the approval that happens in a hallway never come up on a call.

What it produces

A process and time map, a controls register, the exception taxonomy in your team's own wording, a volume baseline pulled from the systems rather than estimated, and a build plan signed by the people who run the work. $15–25k, credited in full against a build signed within 90 days.

Audit input 01 — Interviews

12 sessions with 10 people. Every session transcribed and tagged against the workflow it describes.

RoleSessionsMinutes eachFocus
Engineers460Where time actually goes between picking up work and shipping it
Engineering managers360Review load distribution, triage rules, onboarding
Site reliability260Incident handling, alert quality, runbook currency
Product145Intake, prioritisation, what stalls
CTO245Delivery expectations, architecture guardrails, hiring plan
Audit input 02 — Documentation

29 sources ingested, indexed and made queryable. The working spreadsheets matter most, because they are where the real process lives when the SOP has drifted.

Architecture and service docs8
Runbooks6
Coding standards and review guide4
Incident postmortems7
Onboarding material found in use4
Audit input 03 — Software

9 systems mapped, including the ones nobody lists on an architecture diagram.

Scope
Systems mapped
9
Workflows analysed
9
Exceptions sampled
210
Manual hours per year
7,850

In-scope process work, not total department labour

Where the hours come from
DriverVolumeHours/yr
Pull request review3,400 PRs at 40 min of reviewer time2,267
Codebase and context search22 engineers × 3.1 hrs/week × 46 weeks3,137
Ticket triage5,600 tickets at 12 min1,120
Onboarding support7 hires at 120 supported hours840
Incident write-ups140 incidents at 3.5 hrs490
Total in scope7,850
Of 7,850 manual hours a year
62% carried
  • Carried by agents4,867 hrs62%
  • Stays with people2,983 hrs38%

2,983 hours a year remain manual, and should: judgement calls, genuine exceptions, and the relationships that need a person on the other end. The two shares are complements of one another, so they sum to 100 by construction.

Priority workflows
P1

Codebase context and search

73% automatable$158k

The largest single driver. Engineers spend more time locating context than changing it.

P2

Pull request review

66% automatable$142k

First-pass review on the mechanical checks, with architecture judgement left to a person.

P3

Ticket triage

71% automatable$86k

Classification, duplicate detection and routing against the component owner map.

P4

Onboarding support

58% automatable$62k

Lowest automatable share here because pairing and mentorship are the point.

P5

Incident summarising

64% automatable$42k

Timeline assembly from logs and threads, so the write-up starts from evidence.

The five sum to $490k, the same modelled annual value shown in chapter 01. Bars are each workflow's value against the largest of the five.

Implementation timeline
W1
W4
W8
W12
W16
  1. Audit · 3 weeks
  2. P1 Codebase context and search
  3. P2 Pull request review
  4. P3 Ticket triage
  5. P4 Onboarding support
  6. P5 Incident summarising
  7. Operate · ongoing

Audit 3 weeks, build 10–12 weeks, then continuous operation. Workflows overlap because the connector work for one is usually most of the connector work for the next.

Illustrative

Session counts, document counts and hours are modelled against the basis company, not recorded from an engagement. The method is real; the volumes are what a 22-person engineering function at that size would produce.