Case Study
AI Platform Assessment
See what rigorous, independent platform evaluation looks like.
Case Study
See what rigorous, independent platform evaluation looks like.
This assessment was built for a specific advisory firm with real workflows, real constraints, and real technology decisions to make. Here's the profile.
The firm serves two distinct client segments — small business owners and families with specialized planning needs — each requiring different meeting workflows, documentation standards, and follow-up protocols.
The firm came to us with a straightforward problem: advisors were stuck in a manual five-step loop after every client meeting — writing notes, copying to Word, pasting into the CRM, and manually assigning tasks. They wanted help picking a meeting notetaker.
We already knew these platforms had evolved far beyond meeting capture — document intelligence, proactive AI, practice analytics, custodial data integration, even full CRM replacement. The firm didn't know to ask for any of it. That's the gap independent expertise closes.
We reframed the question from "which tool takes the best notes?" to "which platform changes how your firm works with client information?" The result was an 11-section strategic assessment that gave leadership clarity on a decision they wouldn't have known they were facing — and options they wouldn't have found on their own.
The firm received a comprehensive written deliverable covering every dimension of their decision — grounded in live vendor demos, independent research, and their actual workflows. Here's what we covered.
We distilled the full evaluation into two distinct strategic paths — each with different risk profiles, implementation timelines, and long-term impact.
We profiled each finalist using an identical structure — positioning, narrative assessment, pricing, key strengths, validated gaps, and open items.
We evaluated all four platforms across 40+ dimensions — from core meeting lifecycle to advanced AI — with color-coded ratings tied to the firm's specific needs.
We tested how each platform handles document ingestion, data extraction, and integration with the firm's SharePoint/OneDrive environment.
We assessed capabilities that go well beyond meeting notes — agentic AI, life event detection, proactive nudges, and practice-wide analytics.
We broke down pricing tiers, per-advisor costs, hidden fees, and total cost of ownership — including potential CRM license offsets.
We mapped deployment risk, vendor maturity, change management load, and provided a "choose this platform if" decision framework.
We tracked every unconfirmed vendor claim and outstanding question through resolution, and laid out a concrete action plan.
Every firm faces a fundamental choice when adopting AI: layer new intelligence on top of your current systems, or use it as the catalyst for a deeper transformation. Our assessment maps both paths in detail.
| Path A: AI Meeting Assistant | Path B: AI-Native CRM Replacement | |
|---|---|---|
| What it is | Add an AI layer on top of the existing tech stack. Your existing CRM stays in place. | Replace the existing CRM entirely with an AI-first CRM that embeds intelligence at every touchpoint. |
| Candidates | Zeplyn, Zocks, Jump | Slant CRM |
| Deployment | Days to weeks | Weeks to months |
| Risk level | Low — layers onto existing stack | Higher — full CRM migration and change management |
| Impact scope | Meeting lifecycle + selected workflows | Every client interaction, from meetings to emails to prospecting |
| Best for | Firms that want immediate productivity gains without disrupting core systems | Firms ready for broader transformation and willing to invest in a bigger shift |
Every platform evaluated can capture meeting notes and generate follow-ups. The real differentiation happens in the value-add capabilities that go beyond the core meeting lifecycle.
| Value-Add Capability | Zeplyn | Zocks | Jump | Slant |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic AI / Custom Agents | Strong | Moderate | Limited | Strong |
| Life Event Detection | Strong | Moderate | Moderate | Moderate |
| Document Intelligence | Strong | Strong | None | Strong |
| Form Auto-Fill | None | Strong | Strong | None |
| Practice Intelligence | Strong | Moderate | Moderate | Strong |
| Proactive Nudges | Moderate | Moderate | Limited | Strong |
| Lead Gen / Prospecting | None | None | None | Strong |
| Knowledge Management | Strong | Moderate | Limited | Strong |
Zeplyn and Slant show the broadest coverage across value-add capabilities, but through different architectures. Zeplyn layers intelligence on top of existing tools. Slant consolidates everything into one AI-native platform. Jump's value-add profile is narrower, primarily limited to Smart Forms.
Every assessment follows a structured methodology designed to cut through vendor marketing and surface what actually matters for your firm.
Understand your firm's tech stack, workflows, and pain points. Map out integration requirements and identify what success looks like.
Identify and shortlist the strongest platform candidates based on your specific requirements, not generic industry rankings.
Attend vendor demos with your team, ask the hard questions, and evaluate each platform against your real-world use cases.
Independent capability analysis, gap validation, and integration mapping. Every claim is verified, every trade-off is documented.
Follow up with vendors on every open question and unconfirmed claim. No ambiguity makes it into the final report.
Deliver a comprehensive assessment with a clear path forward, including implementation roadmap and decision framework.
This firm asked us to pick a meeting notetaker.
We handed them a strategic roadmap for AI adoption.
You already know something needs to change. The question is whether you'll navigate it alone — comparing vendor websites and sitting through sales demos — or work with someone who already knows what these platforms can and can't do for firms like yours.
Start a Conversation