APMA was built out of frustration. After years delivering CRM and enterprise projects, I kept seeing the same problems: project plans manually created from SOWs, scope drift nobody catches early, and change orders that come too late or feel adversarial. APMA changes that. You upload a Statement of Work and APMA turns it into a structured, executable project plan. As the project runs, it analyzes activity to flag risks, detect scope creep, and suggest change orders before things go sideways. This is not AI for vibes or a replacement for PMs. It s an assistant built for real delivery teams who want fewer surprises and better outcomes. I d love feedback from PMs, consultants, founders, and delivery leaders: Does this solve a real pain for you? What would make it immediately useful in your workflow? What would stop you from using it? Thanks for checking it out and for any feedback
After 25 years working in enterprise software delivery, I’ve seen the same problem repeat itself across organizations of every size: projects rarely fail because teams don’t work hard. They fail because scope quietly expands, tasks are created outside of the original agreement, and no one notices the drift until the budget or timeline is already blown.
That reality is exactly why we built APMA (AI Project Management Assistant).
APMA reads a Statement of Work and automatically generates the project structure, tasks, and expectations that should exist based on the commitments in that document. From that point forward, it continuously analyzes the project and flags work that appears outside the scope of the original agreement.
Instead of discovering scope creep months later, teams see it as it happens.
A few things that make this approach different from traditional PM tools:
• It starts with the contractual reality of the project (the SOW) rather than a blank project template.
• It uses AI to identify tasks that were never part of the original agreement.
• It gives delivery teams and leadership early warnings of scope risk instead of post-mortems.
Most project tools focus on tracking work.
APMA focuses on protecting the agreement the work was based on.
For consulting firms, agencies, and internal delivery teams, this can dramatically reduce:
• silent scope creep
• margin erosion
• unclear expectations between client and delivery teams
We built this because we’ve personally experienced how frustrating it is when projects drift away from the original agreement and no system is watching for it.
Curious to hear from the Product Hunt community:
Have you ever been on a project where scope creep slowly took over without anyone realizing it until it was too late?
Would love your feedback and questions.