Form, email and WhatsApp.
With three entry points, it is easy to assume someone else has replied.
AI AND AUTOMATION / ENQUIRY HANDLING
A website message should reach the person who replies, complete and with a clear owner. This is the flow we run on our own site, and what a first pilot would look like for you.
THE SERVICE IN BRIEF
The flow takes a message from the form, saves it unchanged with the contact, creates a task for the responsible person and sends the visitor an acknowledgement. It follows rules, without AI judgment. We have used it on our own website since 2 October 2026.
THE PROBLEM
Where a message arrives in several places and nobody is responsible for it.
With three entry points, it is easy to assume someone else has replied.
Until an enquiry has an assigned person, the reply depends on who happens to see it.
When a message is retyped into a spreadsheet, the original is lost.
It receives the enquiry, keeps the original, assigns a task and acknowledges receipt. A person replies.
| Step | What happens automatically | What a person does |
|---|---|---|
| 1. The enquiry arrives | The form receives the message in Bosnian or English. | The visitor describes their goal. |
| 2. The original is kept | The full text is saved unchanged in a note on the contact. | The person replying reads the original, not a summary. |
| 3. A task | A task with the enquiry details is assigned to Danijel. | Danijel reviews the goal, asks for more information and prepares the next step. |
| 4. Acknowledgement | The visitor receives an acknowledgement in the form's language. | Nothing. The acknowledgement promises no price, proposal or result. |
| 5. Repeat processing | Processing the same event again does not create a second task. | Nothing. |
| 6. A new reply | A reply by email or WhatsApp gets its own task. | Danijel reviews it and replies. |
No. The data transfer and the preparation of the task follow rules, without AI judgment.
An AI summary can be a separate add-on for human review, but it does not replace the original message. Danijel reviews the goal and replies. AI does not decide the proposal.
OUR OWN PROJECT / MIDAZ DIGITAL, BANJA LUKA
We checked that the flow delivers and behaves as agreed. We have not measured time saved, sales growth or client results.
Both form languages, the original message matching the task, receipt of email and WhatsApp replies, and repeated processing. A repeat created no second task, and a different message got its own.
No time saving, sales growth or client result was measured. The checks establish delivery and behavior in the tested cases, nothing more.
The flow has run on our own website since 2 October 2026. It is our own system in use, not a results study for another client.
“We run a service business in Banja Luka. We need a website explaining our services with an enquiry form. Could you suggest the next step?”
The flow keeps this text unchanged with the contact and in the task for Danijel, and sends an acknowledgement of receipt. This sample sends nothing and creates nothing.
A business whose enquiries arrive in several places or without a clear owner.
If enquiries are rare and one person sees all of them, a well-organized inbox may be enough. Automation is then not the first step.
Tell us where your enquiries arrive and who replies. We agree the scope and the price before work starts.
One process, agreed inputs, a review with your team and a list of test cases. A pilot is agreed as separate work, with a written quote based on scope.
For each test case we write the expected result and who handles the exception: a complete enquiry, missing information, repeated processing, another message from the same contact and an unavailable service.
A description of the work and a few real examples. We aim to keep your tools and check the limits before we build.
The reply to the customer, the assessment of the goal and every decision about the proposal and the price.
Where a step needs a human decision, we build in a review or an approval. Before the build we decide what the system prepares, what a person checks and which actions need extra approval.
Five cases we test. For two we have published no check from our own site, so every pilot must check them.
| Case | What the flow should do | Checked on our own site? |
|---|---|---|
| A complete enquiry | Keep the original, assign a task, acknowledge receipt. | Yes, in both form languages. |
| The same event processed again | Not create a second task. | Yes, in controlled repetitions. |
| A second message from the same contact | Give it its own task. | Yes. |
| Missing information | Show the original to the person who asks for the rest. | Not among the published checks. It goes on the test list of a first pilot. |
| A service temporarily unavailable | Leave a visible trace of the failure and give the task to a person. | Not among the published checks. It goes on the test list of a first pilot. |
BEFORE YOU START
A website enquiry is saved automatically and gets a responsible person and an acknowledgement. A person still writes the reply.
Not necessarily. For clear rules, ordinary automation is often enough, and our flow runs without AI judgment. AI makes sense where text must be understood or summarized, with human review.
No. It has run on our own website since 2 October 2026. We have no client project and no measured results, so read this page as a description of our own system.
Before going live we agree where a failure becomes visible, who gets the task and how work continues by hand.
That is the aim. We check which integrations your tools support and where there are limits before the build.
It depends on the process, the integrations, the complexity and the support needed. The proposal separates the build from any subscriptions and external service costs.
YOUR NEXT BIG MOVE
Tell us where you are now.
Let's see where you could go.
LET'S START WITH YOUR GOAL.
Show us a task that repeats. Let us see what we can connect, simplify or automate.
Or message Danijel on WhatsApp No obligation. Direct access to your specialist.