Service · Tehran · In person or remote
Workflow automation, software and data integration and in-network dashboards for Tehran companies and technical offices. The studio is here too, which means the process can be watched where it actually happens, and the people who run it are in the room when it is designed.
01, What Tehran offices ask for
Tehran holds the country's largest concentration of technical offices, and the same three requests come out of almost all of them. Which one you're in decides where to start.
A request is raised in one place, approved in another, and recorded in a third, if it is recorded at all. Six months later nobody can show who approved what, and the answer is somewhere in a group chat.
Each one is correct on its own terms. Between them, a person retypes, so the project's number, the invoice's number and the filed drawing's revision are three separate opinions about the same job.
Nothing is visible until somebody assembles it, so the assembling happens on demand and takes the afternoon of whoever is nearest. Everyone knows the report is already out of date when it is sent.
02, Built work
Project status, documents and correspondence on one page, instead of four files and somebody assembling them. Two builds, each in its own language, open either one from here.
Entry to the studio workspace
1 / 4The same four screens for an English-speaking studio, on a dark theme. The structure carries across; the content does not, each office has its own phases, states and naming.
That is the case against a dashboard off a shelf. Columns can be renamed; the order the work moves in cannot.
Demonstration data. No real project, document or person appears on these screens.
03, What being in Tehran changes
The build itself is the same wherever anyone sits. Four things are genuinely different in the same city, and every one of them is about the people the process runs through rather than the code.
What people say the procedure is and what they do at 4pm on a deadline are two different procedures. Sitting in the office for a day catches the second one; a call only ever gets the first.
Every flow that crosses three people has a step two of them think they own. That disagreement is older than the automation and it doesn't get resolved in a thread, it gets resolved by everyone being at one table for an hour.
Most offices here want this running on their own server rather than somewhere else's. Setting it up on the actual machine, with the actual permissions, is an afternoon in the same city and a long remote-access session otherwise.
Automation is abandoned by the staff, not by the managers who bought it. Sitting with the people who will run it the first week is worth more than the documentation, and here, it costs an afternoon.
None of this is a requirement. Plenty of these projects run entirely remote, and the process is identical either way, this is what's available, not what's expected.
04, Process
Four stages. The first two are where most of the risk gets removed.
We watch the real workflow, not the documented one. What's actually done by hand, by whom, and how often it goes wrong.
The problem gets stated in full, with a success measure that can be tested, before any tool is proposed.
Built against your standards and your users. Every added layer of complexity has to earn its place.
Systems are built to change shape as your work grows, so the tool doesn't become the next thing to work around.
05, Questions
Yes, for the stages where it changes the answer, watching the process, the session where step ownership gets agreed, installation and the first week of use. The build itself doesn't improve with anyone in the room, so it isn't billed as if it does.
No. This is the work between your software, whatever that software is, a spreadsheet, an accounting system, a shared drive, a form somebody fills in. Neither dashboard above runs inside an engineering application; both open in a browser. Revit-side automation is its own subject, covered in the Dynamo piece.
Usually not, and we'd argue against it. Replacing a working system is the most expensive way to fix a hand-off. The cheaper answer is almost always to make what you have exchange the record properly.
Yes, and for most offices here that is the default rather than the exception. Where it runs is decided in the first stage, because it changes the build, not assumed and discovered later.
There's no price list, because two automations that look identical from outside can differ by a factor of ten underneath. Four things move the size of the job, and they're set out on the main office automation page. No estimate is given before the problem is stated in full.
No. The studio is based in Tehran and works remotely with teams anywhere. This page exists because being in the same city changes the first stage and the last one, not because it's a condition.
06, Start
Bring the process, not a platform you've been quoted for. If the honest answer is that the process needs writing down before anything is built, we'd rather say that first.
We are not a fit if you want a platform installed without any process review, or an automation of a procedure nobody is willing to write down.
