How do you assess the business case for a cleaning robot?
An hour of work reassigned is not automatically a cash saving. To assess the project, separate the costs genuinely avoided, the time freed for other work and the new spending.
The starting point
Operational benefit and financial saving.
Both are real, but they are not measured the same way and should not be confused.
The operational benefit
Time available for other work, often the work the machine does not do: finishing, checks, one-off requests. That is a gain in capacity, not money coming in.
The financial saving
Spending that genuinely leaves the budget: an outside service reduced, overtime avoided, a cost line removed. It shows up in the accounts.
What not to do
Automatically turning freed hours into a cut in the wage bill. If the people stay and work on something else, the spending has not left the budget.
Framing
Defining the comparison scope.
Without an identical scope on both sides the comparison is worthless — and that is the most common mistake.
To settle before any calculation
- The same cleaning task
- The same usable area, genuinely accessible
- The same frequency of passes
- The same expected standard of result
- The same reference period, twelve months for instance
- Two scenarios: the current set-up, and the set-up with a robot
If the automated scope covers only part of the site, the calculation covers only that part: the rest of the service is identical in both scenarios.
The two tables
Up-front costs and recurring costs.
The columns are deliberately empty: the amounts come from your quote and your organisation, not from a market average.
Up-front costs, once only
| Item | What it covers | Your amount |
|---|---|---|
| Machine and accessories | The equipment chosen and what it needs to run, in the case of a purchase. | |
| Commissioning | Installation, mapping, set-up and first checks, if billed separately. | |
| Training | Handover for the teams concerned, within the scope of the proposal. | |
| Site changes | Only if works or alterations were identified during the assessment. |
First spot what is already included in the stated price: an item covered by the proposal and counted again here skews the calculation against the project.
Recurring costs, every year
| Item | What it covers | Today | With a robot |
|---|---|---|---|
| Human time | Hours spent on the task over the chosen scope, valued at your fully loaded hourly cost. | ||
| Consumables | Products, bags, filters and items replaced regularly. | ||
| Upkeep and wear parts | Brushes, squeegees and parts to replace according to actual use. | ||
| Energy | Consumption from running and charging, if you track it. | ||
| Services taken out | Support and maintenance according to the contract chosen. | ||
| Rental, where applicable | Annual rental if the equipment is leased rather than bought — in that case, leave the “Machine” line of the up-front costs blank. |
These tables contain no default values. The amounts for an ÆNIX project are in the proposal drawn up after the assessment; what a quote contains in detail is explained on the cost page.
The calculation
Three formulas, and their limits.
They are simple to apply, provided you respect what each one actually measures.
Reassignable hours = maximum ( 0 ; current human time − estimated human time after deployment )
Over the same scope and the same period. Taking the maximum with zero avoids a meaningless negative result: if human time goes up there are no reassigned hours, there is an extra cost — which belongs in the recurring costs table.
These hours are a gain in capacity. They only become a saving if a matching item of spending genuinely disappears.
Annual net gain = annual spending genuinely avoided − new or additional annual spending
On the left, what genuinely leaves the budget: a reduced service, overtime avoided, consumables dropped. On the right, what is added: consumables, upkeep, services taken out, any rental, energy.
The result may be negative. That is useful information: it means the project is justified, if at all, by something other than cash — physical strain, consistency of result, the ability to absorb a peak in activity.
Payback (years) = net up-front investment ÷ annual net gain
only if the annual net gain is strictly positive
If the annual net gain is zero or negative, this calculation has no solution: no payback should be shown, and there is no such thing as “immediate” or “infinite” return. The absence of a calculable payback is a result in itself.
This simple payback ignores discounting, tax and the equipment’s residual value. It is an order of magnitude, not a full financial calculation.
- With rental the payment sits in recurring costs; do not also add the full purchase price of the equipment, which is never paid out.
- Compare purchase and rental over the same period, setting each scenario’s annual flows side by side rather than a total against a rental payment.
- Do not combine accounting depreciation and the payment for a purchase in the same cash calculation: that would count the same spending twice.
- The options actually available — purchase, rental or financing — are set out during the assessment, according to the offer in force.
Simplified estimate
A few assumptions, an order of magnitude. Useful for deciding whether to go further, not enough to commit spending.
Full cost
Both tables filled in with your figures and those from the quote, over twelve months. That is the level expected before a decision.
Detailed financial appraisal
Discounted cash flows, tax, residual value, commitment period: that is for your finance department, with its own assumptions.
This method is a way of reasoning. It is not a forecast, it does not represent results observed at ÆNIX or at its clients, and it promises no return.
Robustness
Testing several scenarios.
A calculation that only holds in the best case is not an assessment. Run it again, varying four parameters.
| Parameter | Cautious scenario | Expected scenario | Favourable scenario |
|---|---|---|---|
| Days of use per year | |||
| Share of the scope actually automated | |||
| Remaining human time per pass | |||
| Days unavailable per year | |||
| Annual net gain obtained |
If only the favourable scenario gives a positive net gain, the decision deserves a second look — or the scope needs redefining.
The calculator on this site
What the calculator on the home page works out.
There is only one numerical tool on this site, and it does not calculate a business case. Here is exactly what it does.
Annual hours = number of full-time equivalents × hours per day × 235 working days
Annual value = annual hours × average hourly cost
The figure shown is the annual value of the time spent today on the repetitive tasks you describe. It is not a saving, not a net gain and not a return on investment: no project cost enters this calculation.
- The three sliders are your assumptions: only you know whether they match your organisation.
- The basis of 235 working days a year is shown under the result; adjust mentally if your pattern differs.
- To get from that figure to an assessment you have to subtract what the project costs — which is what the tables above are for.
Freed time and saving: are they the same thing?
No. Freed time is a gain in capacity: people do something else, often what the machine cannot do. A saving only appears if spending actually disappears — an outside service reduced, overtime avoided. Both are worth presenting, but separately.
Which costs should be included?
Up front: machine and accessories in the case of a purchase, commissioning, training, site changes if needed. Recurring: remaining human time, consumables, upkeep and wear parts, energy, services taken out, rental payments if leased. And above all: check what is already in the stated price so nothing is counted twice.
How should purchase and rental be compared?
As cash flows, over a common period. With rental the payment is a recurring cost and the purchase price is never paid out: it must not appear in the calculation. With a purchase the up-front investment is paid once, after which only recurring costs remain. Comparing a purchase total with a monthly rental, without a common period, makes no sense.
Why does it have to be measured on site?
Because the two variables that weigh most — the share of the scope actually automated and the remaining human time — cannot be deduced from a spec sheet. A demonstration or a period of observation gives figures observed in your conditions, instead of assumptions.
What does it mean when no financial payback can be calculated?
That the annual net gain is zero or negative: the project does not pay for itself in cash over the scope studied. That does not necessarily rule it out — consistency of result, less physical strain, the ability to cover areas that were poorly covered — but it has to be said plainly, not hidden behind a flattering figure.
Project review
Figures, but yours.
Give us the scope you have in mind and your current set-up. The assessment is built on your data and on a costed proposal, not on averages.
- Scope considered
- Usable area
- Frequency
- Current set-up
- Human time spent
- Acquisition method
- Phone
- +33 5 33 04 12 27
- contact@aenix.fr
- Coverage
- Across France