Example walkthrough · the engine on its own

What OrbaOS IntApp actually does, screen by screen.

IntApp is the local-first analysis engine — the analyst in the room. Point it at a folder (or a zip) of evidence and it reads the documents, scores how relevant each one is, detects coordination-load drivers, estimates CCR, and interprets the result against The Coordination Capital Doctrine. This walkthrough follows one reviewer running it on the evidence of an anonymised professional-services firm ( Meridian Advisory Group) — entirely on one machine, with nothing leaving the room.

Subject — Meridian Advisory Group

Sector
Professional & advisory services
Employees
~900 across three offices
Recent event
New operating model, mid-rollout
Evidence supplied
A folder of 18 documents
Run by
One reviewer, on a laptop
Time to first read
Under 10 minutes
01

Point it at the evidence

intapp · ingest

Drag in a folder or a project zip. IntApp parses what it finds — board minutes, charters, RACIs, steering decks, spreadsheets — locally. Supported: PDF, DOCX, PPTX, XLSX, Markdown and plain text. Nothing is uploaded anywhere.

intapp ingest ./meridian-evidence/
Drop a folder or a .zip — parsed locally
  • Board_minutes_Q2-Q4.pdf
  • Risk_committee_charter.pdf
  • RACI_material_decisions.xlsx
  • Escalation_matrix_v4.docx
  • ERP_programme_steering_deck.pptx
  • Operating_model_blueprint.pdf
  • Town_hall_Q3_slides.pptx
  • Office_relocation_FAQ.pdf

18 files found · parsing complete · 0 bytes left the machine

02

Intelligent file scan

intapp · discovery

Before anything is analysed, IntApp scores how relevant each file is to a coordination-capital diagnostic — a 0–1 confidence with a band (none / weak / moderate / strong) and the categories it touches. You keep the relevant evidence and discard the noise in one pass.

intapp discovery — relevance scan
Board_minutes_Q2-Q4.pdf
0.88strong
RACI_material_decisions.xlsx
0.74strong
Escalation_matrix_v4.docx
0.66moderate
Risk_committee_charter.pdf
0.61moderate
ERP_programme_steering_deck.pptx
0.59moderate
Town_hall_Q3_slides.pptx
0.22weak
Office_relocation_FAQ.pdf
0.05none

12 of 18 files selected for analysis. Two below the threshold were dropped — you stay in control of what counts as evidence.

03

Coordination-load detection

intapp · diagnostic

A deterministic, no-black-box scan across eight categories. Each finding carries a severity (low → critical), a nature (structural vs reducible), a corroboration-based confidence, and the evidence excerpt it rests on — so every claim is traceable to a document.

intapp diagnostic — 8 categories scanned
Decision Latency — highhighreducibleconf 0.71

“…the proposal returned to the Investment Forum for a third time before commitment could be confirmed…”

evidence: Board_minutes_Q3.pdf

Governance Overhead — mediummediumreducibleconf 0.63

“…Risk and Audit committees both hold a standing review of material commitments…”

evidence: Risk_committee_charter.pdf

Dependency Congestion — mediummediumstructuralconf 0.55

“…each release requires sign-off from Finance, Legal and the programme office in sequence…”

evidence: ERP_programme_steering_deck.pptx

Deterministic detection — the same evidence always yields the same findings. No generative guesswork in the numbers.

04

CCR estimate

intapp · envelope

The engine returns an evidence-derived analysis envelope: a CCR diagnostic estimate, the structural floor, the reducible remainder, a coordination-load score, and an honest data-sufficiency flag. Evidence-derived figures are deliberately conservative — they say what the documents support, no more.

intapp envelope — evidence-derived

CCR diagnostic estimate

33/100

Structural floor

25/100

Reducible load

8/100

Coordination-load score

41/100

Confidence 0.58 (0–1)Data sufficiency limitedEngine OrbaOS Analysis Engine v0.1.0
05

Structural vs reducible — and the drivers

intapp · classification

The load is split into the structural floor (mandated, governed, not cut) and the reducible remainder (the legitimate intervention target), with the main category drivers ranked by score and tagged by nature.

intapp classification — structural vs reducible
Structural floor 76% — governed, not cutReducible 24% — intervention target

Main drivers

Decision Latency (reducible)31
Governance Overhead (reducible)24
Dependency Congestion (structural)22
Escalation Density (reducible)14
Manual Control Burden (structural)9
06

Doctrine interpreter

intapp · interpret

Ask IntApp what the result means. It treats the figures as ground truth (never invents a number), grounds the reading in the doctrine, and streams back a board-ready interpretation: what it says → what it means → what to do next → confidence & evidence gaps.

intapp interpret — streaming
OrbaOS IntAppsource: guidancegrounded in the doctrine · figures unchanged

What the result says. The CCR diagnostic estimate is 33/100, with a structural floor of 25 and a reducible coordination load of 8. Data sufficiency is limited, so read this as a directional first pass.

What it means. Roughly three-quarters of the measured load is structural — mandated by governance, risk and operating-model design, and not a cut target. The reducible remainder is concentrated in Decision Latency and Governance Overhead: repeated re-approvals and overlapping committee mandates. In the doctrine these are classic discretionary load — coordination that can be lowered without breaching the floor.

What to do next. Target the reducible drivers first: collapse the duplicate material-commitment review across Risk and Audit, and set a single decision owner per forum. Treat dependency congestion as a governed item to evidence, not cut.

Confidence & evidence gaps. To move from a first pass to a defensible figure, add a sample-design memo and a RACI for material decisions, then run a measured CCR in Instruments to narrow the interval.

07

Guidance assistant

intapp · assistant

A doctrine-grounded assistant for the methodology itself — how the floor is derived, what a band means, what evidence would raise confidence. It answers from the corpus, and says plainly when the doctrine is silent.

intapp assistant — doctrine Q&A
Why is most of this load called “structural” if it’s clearly slowing us down?
Structural floor is the coordination a firm is obliged to carry — by regulation, risk appetite, governance and genuine operational interdependence. It can be slow and still be legitimate; the doctrine governs it rather than cutting it. What you act on is the reducible remainder above the floor. Here that's ~24% of the load — and that is where speed can be recovered without weakening control.

Answers come from the doctrine corpus; when the doctrine is silent, IntApp says so rather than improvising.

08

Board-ready output

intapp · report

A diagnostic report you can hand to a board or partner — the figures, the drivers, the interpretation and the evidence references — exported from the appliance. It stays on the machine you ran it on.

intapp report — local export

Diagnostic report · evidence-derived

Coordination Capital — first-pass diagnostic, Meridian Advisory Group

CCR 33/100 · floor 25 · reducible 8 · confidence 0.58 (limited) · 12 evidence references

Sections: headline figures · structural/reducible split · drivers · findings with evidence · doctrine interpretation · evidence gaps.

Export as HTML/PDF from the appliance. The file — and the evidence behind it — never leaves the machine you ran it on.

The thing that makes it different

IntApp is local-first. It computes in memory and forgets: no telemetry, no cloud round-trip, no enterprise data leaving the room. The same engine powers the cloud platform and on-prem appliance — when used by OrbaOS Instruments it is fully stateless, returning figures and interpretations without storing a thing.

Run it on your own evidence

IntApp is sold as an annual licence for a single practitioner or a small team, and is the engine inside every Instruments deployment. See the plans, or talk to us about an on-prem or air-gapped appliance.