Evidence
What changes when the service team can see the problem first.
Each example follows the same structure: the challenge, the existing process, the guided video workflow, what changed and the operational result.
Illustrative example. These are modelled service scenarios built from typical field-service operating figures, not results measured with a named customer. Verified customer results will be published here once they are available and approved.
Service cases
What a completed service case looks like.
Illustrative workflow views across five sectors. Example content, not customer data.
Service case #5107
Inverter offline since Monday morning
- Customer
- Beckers Logistics
- Location
- Roof array B — Eindhoven
- Asset
- String inverter 25 kW
- Serial
- INV-31204
- Fault code
- F13
- Owner
- Solar service desk
Recommended next action
Site visit scheduled — bring replacement DC isolator and string tester
Service case #5122
Water ingress above first-floor office
- Customer
- Harbour Facilities
- Location
- Block C — Rotterdam
- Asset
- Pitched tile roof — chimney flashing
- Section
- Rear slope, chimney line
- Reported
- After heavy rainfall
- Owner
- Roofing estimator
Recommended next action
Quote from video — no survey visit required before works
Service case #5149
Alarm panel showing fault at side entrance
- Customer
- Northgate Retail Park
- Location
- Gate 2 — Dublin
- Asset
- Alarm panel + entrance camera
- Serial
- AP-77210
- Indicator
- Zone 4 fault on keypad
- Owner
- Security support desk
Recommended next action
Resolved remotely — zone 4 contact reset on site, no dispatch needed
Service case #5168
Charge session stops at 3 minutes
- Customer
- City Fleet Services
- Location
- Depot bay 7 — Antwerp
- Asset
- 22 kW AC charge point
- Serial
- EVC-40911
- Fault code
- E-021
- Owner
- Charging support desk
Recommended next action
Technician visit — bring RCD module and type 2 socket assembly
Service case #5183
Combi oven tripping the breaker on start-up
- Customer
- Meridian Foods
- Location
- Main kitchen — Waterford
- Asset
- Commercial combi oven
- Serial
- OV-20884
- Fault code
- AL-07
- Owner
- Equipment service desk
Recommended next action
Right technician assigned — heating element and contactor pre-ordered
Industrial equipment service
Equipment manufacturer with a national service engineer network
Illustrative exampleChallenge
Machine downtime calls were logged from a second-hand description. Engineers frequently travelled to identify the fault rather than to repair it.
Existing process
Operator calls the service desk, the desk records a short description, a visit is scheduled, parts are guessed from the description.
What changed
- Equipment and fault code confirmed before scheduling
- Parts ordered against the verified model and revision
- Some resets and consumable issues resolved without a visit
Guided video workflow
- 01Service desk sends a guided link to the machine operator
- 02Operator films the machine, the control panel code and the serial plate
- 03Technical team reviews the case within the same working day
- 04Case is closed remotely, or an engineer is dispatched with confirmed parts
Modelled result
- Dispatches avoided
- 12 of 100 requests
- First-time fix rate
- 72% → 84%
- Time to diagnosis
- 1.5 days → same day
Modelled on a 6-engineer regional service team handling around 100 requests a month.
HVAC service
Commercial HVAC maintenance contractor
Illustrative exampleChallenge
Repeat visits caused by missing parts and by call-outs that turned out to be settings, filters or user error.
Existing process
Site contact reports a fault by phone or email, a technician is dispatched on the next available slot.
What changed
- Avoidable call-outs identified before scheduling
- Technicians briefed visually before arriving
- Completion documented with before and after evidence
Guided video workflow
- 01Site contact receives a guided capture link with the service confirmation
- 02They record the unit, the display, the error code and the affected space
- 03Coordinator triages the case before assigning a slot
- 04Technician receives the case with the video attached to the job
Modelled result
- Unnecessary visits avoided
- 9%
- Repeat visits
- reduced by about a fifth
- Technician travel
- around 4 hours saved per technician per month
Modelled on a contractor running 15 technicians across commercial sites.
Renewable energy maintenance
Solar and wind asset maintenance operator
Illustrative exampleChallenge
Remote sites made every unnecessary visit expensive, and specialist engineers were travelling long distances to assess faults.
Existing process
A local site attendant reports an alarm, a specialist is scheduled to travel and assess on site.
What changed
- Specialist assessment happens before travel
- Correct component identified before mobilisation
- Proof of completion recorded without a verification visit
Guided video workflow
- 01Site attendant captures guided video of the inverter, string or turbine component
- 02Serial, alarm code and surrounding condition recorded as required steps
- 03Specialist reviews remotely and decides on the intervention
- 04Completion and condition left documented by the attending engineer
Modelled result
- Specialist assessment visits avoided
- roughly 1 in 6
- Parts preparation accuracy
- noticeably improved
- Service response time
- shortened by about a day
Modelled on a distributed asset portfolio with long travel distances between sites.
Model it against your own service numbers.
Bring one workflow to a 30-minute session and we will look at where guided video would change the decision, the preparation or the documentation.
Prefer to try the capture workflow yourself first? Start a free account