Back to Case Studies
Cost Optimisation

Cost Leakage Detection

Found hidden cost leakage in provider payouts and non-completed sessions, recovering ~10% of operational costs.

S$457K
savings identified
Intellect
Senior Data Analyst

The Problem

As Intellect scaled across 36 countries with 500+ providers, operational costs were growing faster than revenue. No one had done a deep audit of where money was actually going. Three separate leakage areas were eventually uncovered:

1

Provider rate mismatch

High-cost providers being recommended when affordable alternatives existed.

2

Recurring session abandonment

Users missing recurring sessions but providers still getting paid.

3

Non-completion leakage

Non-completed sessions still counted in payout calculations.

The Hypothesis

Operational costs weren't just growing with scale — there was structural leakage in how sessions were being allocated, completed, and paid for. A data-driven audit of the payout pipeline would reveal recoverable costs without reducing service quality.

The Approach

Built a comprehensive cost analysis tracking every session from booking to payment. This audit uncovered three distinct leakage areas, each requiring a different fix.

1

Provider Rate Mismatch

Found a S$457K savings opportunity, representing 16.5% of base costs. High-cost providers were being surfaced when 48% of supply was affordable. Recommended a cost-penalty layer on the recommendation algorithm.

S$457K
savings opportunity
16.5%
of base costs
48%
affordable supply unused
2

Recurring Session Abandonment

Found that users missing one session had a 75% probability of missing ALL subsequent ones, yet providers were paid for all. Ran a backend experiment requiring user confirmation for upcoming sessions.

Before / After Experiment
Paid non-completions
41%
Paid non-completions
10%
75% reduction in wasted payouts
3

Non-Completion Leakage

14.4% of total spend was going to sessions that never completed. Proposed shifting from credit-based to session-based payouts, recalculating bonuses only for completed sessions.

14.4%
spend on incomplete sessions
~6%
projected monthly recovery
Proposed Model Shift
Credit-based payouts
pay for allocation
Session-based payouts
pay for completion

The Result

~10%
Operational cost reduction
From provider rate mismatch fix
41% 10%
Paid non-completions
From recurring session experiment
~6%
Monthly cost recovery
From session-based payout model
16%+
Total cost base addressed
Combined impact of all three initiatives

Business Impact

Recovered significant operational spend that was being wasted on non-value activities.

Changed how the company thinks about payout models — from "pay for allocation" to "pay for completion."

The cost-penalty layer improved recommendation quality while also reducing costs — a rare win-win.

Finance team now has real-time visibility into cost leakage through dashboards built from this analysis.

Let's work together.

Looking for a data person who can go from SQL to boardroom? I'd love to chat.