Customer case case · Rocketizer Intelligence

BProof grade

8Metrics retained

3Evidence records

LuMay AIVendor

Reported outcomes

60 percent reductionAudit-preparation reduction — headline/index versionThe deployment observation window is not disclosed. · LuMayBaseline: 2–3 weeks per audit cycle in the detail page · Formula: The headline does not give its post-deployment time and conflicts with the detail page's 95% faster value.

95 percent fasterAudit-preparation reduction — detail-page versionThe deployment observation window is not disclosed. · LuMayBaseline: 2–3 weeks per compliance check · Formula: The after value is under 4 hours, but the source does not state whether weeks mean elapsed or working time; the exact 95% formula therefore cannot be reproduced.

12 audits per quarter, more thanAudits completed per quarterThe relevant quarter and number of measured quarters are not disclosed. · LuMay; attributed to Markus HoffmannBaseline: 4 audits per quarter with the same team · Formula: At least 12 post-deployment audits / 4 baseline audits = at least 3x throughput.

60 percent gainTeam productivity gainNo measurement window is disclosed. · LuMayBaseline: The page gives retrieval-time shares and audit capacity but no direct productivity denominator. · Formula: The page does not show how 60% was calculated; retrieval share fell 50 points (70% to 20%), not 60 points.

20 percent of engineer time after deploymentEngineer time spent on document retrievalNo observation window is disclosed. · LuMayBaseline: 70% of engineer time · Formula: 70% baseline minus 20% after = 50 percentage points lower, equivalent to a 71.4% relative reduction.

90 percent automatedCompliance checks automatedNo observation window is disclosed. · LuMayBaseline: 0% automated; fully manual · Formula: 90% post-deployment minus 0% baseline = 90 percentage points; human review remains for ambiguous edge cases and final sign-off.

200 documents, more than, in under 4 hoursQMS documents checked in one runOne compliance check in under 4 hours; calendar date undisclosed · LuMayBaseline: The prior document count per audit is not disclosed beyond 'hundreds.' · Formula: The source gives a threshold count and duration but no run logs, document-size distribution or counting rules.

87 percent reductionAudit-findings reduction — success-summary versionThe summary gives no audit or measurement window. · LuMayBaseline: The before and after finding counts are not disclosed. · Formula: The page does not disclose the audits, standards, finding severity, denominator or calculation.

Context and boundaries

Workflowidentity_verification_and_complianceNamed quantified QMS case whose customer identity and core audit-prep metric conflict across LuMay's own surfaces.

Implementation??

CaveatsThe headline names goxpedite; the success summary calls the customer MedDevice; the detail body uses an anonymous medical-device firm; and the quote identifies only Markus Hoffmann and a German manufacturer role.–The headline/index says 60% lower audit-prep time, whereas the detail page says 95% faster.–The detail page labels a 70%-to-20% retrieval-time shift as part of a separate 60% productivity gain; these are different and unreconciled measures.–The 87% audit-findings reduction appears only in the summary, not the detail page.vendor_owned

Source trail

LuMay case-studies index
LuMay's current case index exposes four detail stories: EDI Translation Agents, a financial-services Voice Agents deployment associated with Reema, a QMS story whose headline names goxpedite, and the internal MyLu build. The index reports 12 hours to 2 minutes and 85% cost reduction for EDI; 18 minutes to under 4 minutes and 55% higher CSAT for the voice story; 60% audit-prep reduction and 3x audit throughput for QMS; and a five-day internal MyLu build. Several index values conflict with the linked detail pages.
company · accessed 2026-07-13
LuMay success-stories summary
The summary repeats EDI, financial-services voice and QMS outcomes and claims every metric is named and methodology-cited. In practice the voice customer company remains anonymous, and the QMS identity and values conflict across LuMay surfaces. It adds EDI expansion from 3 to 14+ languages; voice results of +18 CSAT points, 62% lower annual operating cost and 1.2 million calls per month; QMS audit findings down 87%; first-agent delivery in 2–4 weeks; and ROI-positive results by week 12 for most engagements, with one EU on-premises outlier taking longer.
company · accessed 2026-07-13
QMS Compliance Agents case study
The headline names goxpedite, while the body describes a leading medical-device compliance firm and attributes a quote to Markus Hoffmann at a German medical-device manufacturer. The same page reports 2–3 weeks to under 4 hours and labels this 95% faster; 60% team productivity gain; document-retrieval time falling from 70% to 20% of engineer time; 90% automation from 0%; 4 to 12+ audits per quarter; and 200+ QMS documents checked in under 4 hours. The case index instead says audit prep fell 60%, and the success hub calls the customer MedDevice and adds an 87% reduction in audit findings.
company · accessed 2026-07-13

← Back to customer atlas