Automate your accounting processes: less data entry, books ready sooner
Every month, someone at your company retypes numbers from one system into another. It works, which is exactly why nobody ever questioned it. But those are qualified hours that produce no analysis, and that is where the gaps you find at close come from.
ellr removes that work. Not the team: the work.
The work we remove, named plainly
This is not optimization in the abstract. These are specific tasks: the ones that fill an accounting technician's or a bookkeeping clerk's day and never once asked for their judgment:
- exporting a CSV from one business system, reformatting it, importing it somewhere else
- re-keying sales, deposits, subcontractor invoices, hours
- categorizing line by line what always follows the same rule
- comparing three sources to work out why one amount does not match
- rebuilding the same reconciliation spreadsheet every month, in the same order, with the same filters
These are tasks, not jobs. When they disappear, the person who did them does not disappear with them: they get back the hours where they are genuinely useful (analysis, exceptions, the questions nobody has time to ask). The site already says it in the shortest possible way: your team analyzes instead of re-keying.
This is also the work that burns people out. An SMB hiring twice in one year for the same administrative role does not have a recruiting problem; it has a process problem.
the three hidden costs between your operations and QuickBooks
Why accounting automation fails when nobody specifies it
Automating an accounting process is not a technical problem. Or rather: the technical half is the easy half.
The real work comes first, and it is accounting work. Which entries get created, and when? Which account receives what? How do GST and QST behave when the data arrives from a system that does not calculate them the way QuickBooks does? What happens when the source sends the same transaction twice? And above all: what proof shows that the result balances?
An automation nobody answered those questions for does not break. That is the danger: it keeps running and drifts silently. Three months later the books no longer match, and nobody can say from which date.
At ellr the order never changes: the accounting requirement leads, the technology follows. We write down what has to happen in your books first, then build what makes it happen. Never the other way around.
What gets automated in practice
Each engagement activates one or more of these levers, depending on your systems and your accounting constraints. What gets automated is decided at the diagnostic, never in advance.
Entry and import
Transactions leave their source system and land in your books without a hand retyping them. Scheduled or event-triggered import, depending on the rhythm of the flow.
Categorization on your rules
Your rules, not generic ones. Accounts, classes, taxes, projects: whatever follows consistent logic applies itself, and whatever needs judgment goes to a human.
Reconciliation
Matching the source system, the books, and the bank deposits happens continuously instead of in one month-end evening.
Reconciliation reports
A recurring report that puts the source, the books, and the variance side by side. It needs no interpretation: thirty seconds tells you whether the month balances.
Gap alerts
A flow that fails or drifts flags itself. Gaps surface before the monthly close, not after, which is the whole difference between a correction and an investigation.
What stays afterward, once the engagement is delivered: monthly monitoring, with an accounting expert checking that the books stayed right when your systems or rules changed. Accounting automation nobody watches eventually starts to lie.
our three service levers in detail
the system families we connect most often
who maintains the integration after delivery
Two disciplines, one engagement
This is where the difference sits, and it is structural rather than commercial.
The market has two camps. On one side, integrators who know how to connect systems without knowing what an accounting entry has to contain. On the other, accountants who know exactly what should happen and have nobody to build it. In between sits an SMB paying twice: once for the automation, once for the cleanup.
Eve Leblanc is a senior accountant and a QuickBooks Elite expert. She defines what has to happen on the accounting side: the entries, the taxes, the categorization rules, and the test that proves the result balances.
Luc Rousseau brings twenty years of APIs, integrations, and custom automation. He turns that definition into a workflow that runs in production, monitors itself, and recovers when a source changes.
One engagement, one team, all the context in one place. You do not have to be the bridge between a technical vendor and an accounting firm: the bridge is the product.
QuickBooks Online, and what happens if you are not on it
QuickBooks Online is the most frequent destination in our engagements, and Eve's QuickBooks Elite expertise is a real advantage: GST/QST specifics, the chart of accounts, what the API accepts and what it refuses (familiar ground rather than ground to discover).
It is not a prerequisite for talking to us.
If your books live somewhere else (Sage, Acomba, Xero, a desktop version, a homegrown system), the question is the same, and so is the answer more often than not: the manual work we remove does not depend on which software receives the data. We look at your process, tell you what can be automated in your context, and if the best recommendation is to leave your accounting system alone, that is what we will write.
The one case where we will say so plainly: when your system is closed enough that nothing goes in or out except by hand, and you have no intention of changing it. There is no honest engagement to sell you there, and you will learn that at the diagnostic rather than after the invoice.
a real engagement, from PMS to books
What ellr does not do
A clear boundary reassures more than an offer that promises everything.
ellr does not do bookkeeping. Your accountant or your firm keeps their role, their mandate, and their relationship with you. We are not here to take it, and we are not competing with them.
ellr does not replace your tools either. Your management system, your store, your PMS, your payroll software stay yours. ellr builds what connects them to your books, not what replaces them.
ellr does not stand in for your finance leadership or your IT team. Where a technical team is already in place, it knows how to ship; what it lacks, and what nobody should expect it to have, is the accounting specification of what to build. That is exactly what we bring, and your teams keep their stack, their tools, and their code.
What we deliver is yours. You keep ownership of the code.
Where to start: the Flow Diagnostic
Nobody should commit to an automation engagement without knowing what they are buying. That is what the Flow Diagnostic is for, and it is where all our engagements begin.
Within two weeks we map your systems, flag the re-keying points and the recurring gaps, and hand you a costed recommendation. Fixed price, shared on the qualification call, no commitment, and credited in full against the integration engagement you choose afterward.
Three outcomes, all of them honest: an ellr engagement, delivery by your own teams from our specifications, or nothing at all because it is not worth the effort. You keep the map in all three cases.
Tell us about your flows
Describe your situation in a few lines: which systems are involved, and what is getting stuck today. We read every request personally and get back to you within 2 business days.
No commitment · Response within 2 business days · Confidential