Founder, TOLVEN
I'm Krister. I build these systems.
Krister Gabrāns
Founder
I'm 19. I'm from Latvia. I started TOLVEN because I kept seeing the same thing in professional service firms: capable people doing the same repetitive tasks every week, convinced they didn't have time to change how they worked. I've spent the last two years building these systems, first for my own operation, where agents run my research, my outreach, and my reporting every day. TOLVEN is the business built around doing that for firms like yours, and being good enough at it that you'd be foolish to use anyone else.
When I come into the audit call, I'm looking for three things: what the team does most often, what takes longest per instance, and what stops entirely when a specific person is unavailable. Those three questions almost always converge on the same two or three workflows.
The first system built is never the most technically interesting one. It's the one that clears the most hours fastest. A recruitment desk's CV screener is not a difficult build. But if it removes two hours a day from four consultants, it's the right first build, because after 30 days the team can see exactly what changed, measure it, and trust the next one.
The second and third systems build on what the first revealed about how the firm actually works, not how it described itself in the audit. Those two versions are always slightly different. The systems adapt to the real one.
These are not the only industries where this technology applies. They are the ones where the highest-volume work maps cleanest onto what current agent systems do reliably: scheduling, screening, monitoring, drafting, chasing. The margins in these verticals support the investment. The workflows are measurable. And the output is visible within 30 days, which is the only way I can stand behind a guarantee.
Other professional service verticals may qualify. The audit call is the honest way to find out.
Most firms offering AI services take any client they can get. That means building unfamiliar workflows from scratch for each engagement, with no accumulated pattern recognition. Working only in recruitment, estate agencies, and marketing agencies means I've already mapped the workflows before you describe them. The build is faster. The result is more precise. The guarantee is possible because I'm not guessing.
Measurable output in 30 days or month one is free. That guarantee exists because I only take engagements where I can see the output before I build it. If I can't name the metric on the audit call, I won't take the work. The firms that see the most from the first 30 days are the ones who could already describe which hours they wanted back. The guarantee is the structure of the engagement. It's not a risk I take lightly.
A free discovery call fills with people who are curious, not ready. The €399 audit call ensures the first conversation is serious on both sides. What you receive within 48 hours, a written workflow map and a specific proposal, is a sample of the actual engagement. If the proposal isn't good enough to act on, you've spent €399 to find that out before committing to anything bigger. That's a fair exchange.
The firms that deploy these systems in the next two years will look back at the ones that didn't the way you look back at firms that refused to get email in 1995. That is not hype. It is an observation about which of your competitors are currently running CV screeners, lead response systems, and automated report assembly, and which are not. The gap between them is widening every month.
I want TOLVEN to be the firm that helped the serious ones get there first.
In 2026, most B2B pitches sound the same. Transformation, efficiency, the future of work. The technology is real. The claims frequently aren't. What I've observed is more specific: there are a handful of workflow types where the current generation of agent systems performs reliably and produces measurable output. CV screening is one of them. Viewing scheduling is one of them. Reference call logistics is one of them. Client report assembly is one of them.
There are workflow types where it currently underperforms: anything requiring genuine judgment about a relationship, complex negotiation, creative direction that matters, or work where being wrong has serious consequences. I don't build systems for those workflows. Not because I couldn't, but because the output isn't reliable enough to stand behind with a guarantee.
The firms that get the most from this in the first 30 days are the ones who already know which hours they want back.
Riga marathon, 42km. Finished.
The Tatras. The long way up.
Outside of work I run marathons and climb mountains. Not because it looks good on a website, but because I think how you do anything is how you do everything. Both are the same discipline as building systems: a clear goal, a long stretch of unglamorous work nobody sees, and a result you can't fake.
If the audit call reveals this isn't a fit, I'll say so before the 20 minutes are up and refund the fee. I'd rather tell you that than take the engagement and deliver below the benchmark. One bad result costs more than the call fee.
Every proposal names a number. Not “significant time savings” or “improved efficiency.” A specific output metric, agreed before the build begins, measured at day 30. That number is the engagement. Everything else is detail.
The first month builds one or two systems. Months two and three build the next two. The ongoing retainer is what makes the whole thing compound. I'm not interested in a single-month engagement followed by a handoff document. The system runs better when I'm monitoring it.
I don't scale by adding junior staff to handle overflow. Every client I take gets direct access to me. That limits how many I can work with at once. It also means the work is consistent. The firms that suit this model are the ones who want a partner, not a vendor.
The audit call is 20 minutes. You describe how your team works. I map it, identify the right starting point, and tell you exactly what would change and when. If it isn't a fit, I'll say so before the time is up.
Not sure if your firm qualifies? Read what we build for recruitment agencies, estate agents, and marketing agencies.