See auxi in action
your workflows and save you time!
You approve an AI tool after a pilot shows that your team can finish a recurring task in half the time. Three months later, your finance director asks for the return. You have usage reports, enthusiastic comments, and an estimate of hours saved. You still need to explain the effect on profit.
At auxi, we build PowerPoint software for consulting and finance professionals. We should expect buyers to ask that question of us. A credible estimate of AI ROI in consulting requires you to follow released capacity through to additional contribution or avoid expenditure, then deduct the costs of achieving those gains.
You may choose to spend the time on better analysis or shorter working days. Count those benefits in their own terms. Finance teams need a separate calculation for financial returns.
A billing rate measures what you charge
Consider a hypothetical practice that saves 1,000 hours during a quarter. At a billing rate of $250 an hour, a practice partner might report $250,000 of value.
To earn that revenue, the practice must have demand, sell the work and deliver it with the available skills. An analyst with spare hours cannot replace a sector specialist the new engagement requires. A team with capacity on Friday cannot recover from a client deadline it missed on Tuesday.
The finance director must also check how the firm earns its fees. On a fixed-fee engagement, completing the agreed scope with less effort can improve engagement economics. Under hourly billing, the firm may invoice fewer hours. Salaried employees remain on the payroll in both cases; a lower allocation of their time to one project does not establish a reduction in cash expenditure.
Use the billing-rate calculation to describe a capacity scenario, with its assumptions. Give finance the evidence for the portion the practice converted into revenue or avoided cost.
Account for the destination of the time
Assume the practice uses 400 of the released hours to staff additional client work and 200 to replace planned external specialist support. The case teams use another 250 hours to deepen the analysis on existing engagements. Associates recover the remaining 150 hours through reduced overtime or time off the staffing plan.
The practice finance lead should trace the additional work to signed engagements and the external support to expenditure the partner had approved. Engagement managers can document the extra analysis, while the staffing lead checks whether the reduction in overtime occurred. Each use has a different financial consequence.
Assume finance calculates $45,000 of incremental contribution from the additional work after its incremental delivery costs. The practice avoids $18,000 of contractor expenditure and incurs $20,000 in software, implementation and additional review costs during the same period.
The practice has a $43,000 net financial benefit: $45,000 plus $18,000 minus $20,000. Relative to the $20,000 investment, the illustrative ROI is 215%.
Finance should check the boundaries. It must exclude review costs from the contribution calculation if it deducts them in the investment total. It should confirm that the engagement partner would have approved that external support without the tool. For an annual case, it should use annual costs and benefits rather than comparing one quarter's costs with a year's capacity.
The example leaves 400 hours outside the financial return. The practice can still value stronger analysis and reduced overtime. It needs evidence before attaching a dollar amount to either.
Distinguish utilization from engagement margin
A practice can improve utilization by staffing recovered hours on another case. That does not establish the margin on the new work. A discounted fee or additional partner involvement can consume the benefit. Review the realized fee against the staffing pyramid and the hours the team incurred, including write-offs on work the client will not pay for.
The staffing lead also has to match the available consultant to the workstream. Several scattered hours across associates may be insufficient to staff a new case. Treat those fragments differently from freeing a consultant for a defined period on the staffing plan.
Include the work after the first draft
An engagement manager can measure the time an associate spends taking a workstream from analysis to a partner-ready deck. Measuring a professional deliverable requires more care. Include the author's revisions and the reviewer's checks, then record the date the responsible person accepts the work.
Keep active labor separate from elapsed time. A deck may require six hours of work spread over three days because a partner cannot review it until Thursday. Saving an hour of drafting has little effect on the deadline if the team leaves that approval arrangement unchanged.
Compare similar workstreams and use the same quality standard. Record changes in scope and team experience. A pilot that compares a simple repeat assignment with a first attempt at a difficult brief will give the buyer a misleading estimate.
Put redeployment on the staffing agenda
A 2026 survey of more than 1,100 respondents reported positive AI ROI in strategic response management within twelve months for a share approaching two-thirds of organizations. Respondents supplied these assessments; the vendor-sponsored study does not establish a causal return for your practice. It does show that a skeptical evaluation can accommodate positive outcomes.
Give the practice partner and staffing lead responsibility for the released capacity during the pilot. Ask that person to identify work the team could accept, expenditure it could avoid, or quality improvements it wants to fund. Without that decision, the tool vendor and the buyer may both estimate value that no practice partner has a plan to realize.
For an auxi evaluation, we would encourage you to bring a representative deliverable and the people who approve it. Measure their combined effort. Then ask the practice leader to explain the next use of the time. You will have a stronger purchasing case and a clearer view of the management decisions required to achieve it.