For agencies and client work
One workflow,thirty sets of credentials.
An agency's problem is never building the thing once. It is building it once and running it thirty times, for thirty businesses whose accounts, tone, timezones and opinions are all slightly different — and being able to explain, at the end of the month, what each of them got.
The three-person agency.
Three people, twenty-eight clients, mostly small businesses. The work is genuinely repetitive: a monthly campaign, a weekly post, a lead form that has to reach the right inbox within the hour, and a report on the first of the month that shows what happened.
The reason they are busy is not that any of that is hard. It is that they do it twenty-eight times, and the twenty-eight are just different enough that no template quite fits. Client twelve wants Polish and English. Client nineteen refuses to send anything before ten in the morning. Client four's inbox belongs to somebody who has never once replied.
So the shape is: one workflow, parameterised, run per client, with the differences held as configuration rather than as twenty-eight copies that have quietly diverged.
Credentials stay the client's.
Each client's accounts are their own credential set, stored encrypted, referenced by name. The workflow refers to the set, not to the secret, so the same published workflow runs against twenty-eight different sets of accounts without twenty-eight copies of anything.
Which means rotating a key is one edit in one place. It also means a client who leaves takes their credentials with them: delete the set and every workflow that referenced it stops for that client, immediately and visibly, rather than continuing to work for six weeks because nobody remembered.
One version,
or a version per client.
Publishing an improvement pushes it to every client at once, which is the point of building it once. Where a client genuinely needs something different, that difference is a branch inside the shared workflow with a condition on the client, not a fork — because a fork is a thing that gets fixed in one place and not the other.
Runs in flight are unaffected either way: each run walks the version it entered on, so improving a workflow on the twelfth does not disturb a client's campaign that started on the tenth.
- ⚡ScheduleOne run per client. 28 runs, one published version.
- 2Configuration readTone, languages, sending window, approver. Per client.
- 3Copy and pictureDrafted, then illustrated from the licensed library.
- ✋ApprovalClient 19 requires it and waits. The other 27 proceed.
- ✉SentEach on the client's own accounts, in the client's own window.
- 📄ReportSame shape for everyone, so month-to-month means something.
28 credential sets1 workflow to maintain
One workflow. Thirty clients.
Nobody notices.
What agencies build
Six that pay back fast.
The monthly report
Assembled from numbers on the first, in the same shape for every client, before anybody asks. The single most common reason an agency starts here.
Lead routing
A form arrives on a client's site, an AI step reads what the person actually wants, and it reaches the right inbox within the minute — with a copy to you, so a client who ignores leads can be shown that they do.
Onboarding a client
Accounts connected, workflows enabled, configuration filled, first report scheduled. The checklist becomes a workflow, and the fourteenth client gets the same start as the first.
Content calendars
Posts drafted, illustrated from the licensed library, queued for approval and published on the client's own schedule.
Watching for problems
A client's site down, a form that has stopped submitting, a feed that has gone quiet for three days. Better that you notice than that they do.
Offboarding
Credentials deleted, workflows stopped, a final report produced. Done properly it takes ten minutes; done from memory it takes six months and an awkward e-mail.
What you can tell a client.
That the work is done on their own accounts, so what is produced is theirs and stays theirs when the relationship ends. That every run is logged, so a question about what happened on the fourteenth has an answer. And that the campaign was simulated before it went out, which is a better answer than “we checked it carefully”.
The Team plan exists for this shape of work: a shared workflow library so the good version is the one everybody uses, role-based access so a junior can run a workflow without being able to rewrite it, and enough AI steps to cover a portfolio rather than a project. The numbers are on the pricing page.
Where this stops being a good idea: if all twenty-eight clients genuinely need something different, you do not have a workflow, you have twenty-eight workflows and a filing problem. The technique above works because most agency work is the same job with different names in it. Where it is not, be honest about that before you build a configuration system with twenty-eight special cases in it.