The best possible admin AI writes every document faster. That is where Ergomania starts — the draft — and everything that decides a case happens after it: the prescription that pays for the therapy, the block that must fit inside its validity, the evidence that renews it. We don't out-write a writing tool. We change what the software is for.
Underestimating them is how you lose to them. Credit first — then the questions their architecture cannot answer.
Every strength on that list is about producing text. Not one is about carrying a case.
A good typist with a security badge is genuinely useful — and structurally blind to the loop the Praxis actually runs on. That blindness is the opening.
Cancellations, school holidays, validity windows: answering takes a calendar that models remaining units against dates. That is planning logic, not prose — a template has no calendar.
Checkpoints compare ratings to an expected corridor and draft the recalibration — plus the physician's extension case. That takes a phase model of the whole block. A text engine has no opinion about progress.
Consent is per-recipient state — separated custody, photo consent, school reports — gating every export. An email drafter has no concept of who is allowed to see.
Fluent AI makes embellishment cheaper — the payer's quiet fear. The answer is architectural: reports cite only documented ratings, behind an approval gate, over an audit line. More fluency without that makes the problem worse.
Substitution needs a handover pack — block state, active cues, contraindications — generated from structured case state without exposing the whole record. A folder of documents is not a handover.
Session notes are captured in the 90 seconds after the child leaves — offline, syncing later. A cloud chat assistant simply is not in the room.
A gap is a feature they could ship. An asymmetry is a gap they cannot close without breaking something they have already sold.
Zero retention is their headline security feature — a contractual vow to remember nothing. Progress corridors, block pacing, and outcome benchmarks require consented longitudinal memory. They cannot collect what our product learns from without repudiating their own marketing. We answer the same fear differently: memory with consent, CH hosting, audited access.
{{ financeClause }} Horizontal economics punish depth: every sprint spent modelling the Verordnung is a sprint their finance customers paid for and didn't get. To follow us, they must fork the company.
A Word add-in treats the document as the product. Ergomania treats it as a rendering of structured clinical state — one documented truth, five audiences. You cannot retrofit a spine into a text box.
Faster drafting sharpens the question that decides adoption: can I sign this? Their answer is tone. Ours is architecture — documented ratings only, approval gate, audit line, refusal to diagnose. Payers and associations standardize on accountability, not typing speed.
Their webinar funnel ends at a therapist's login. Our reports land with physicians, schools, parents, and the Praxisleitung — every recipient a future node of the referral graph. A seat-seller has no path to the network.
Ergomania is the operating system for the prescription cycle: it plans the whole block, adapts it to documented progress, and renders every report from one accountable truth.
Verordnungs-System — never “AI documentation assistant.” Their category name is a commodity; ours has one occupant.
Not “which writes faster” — “which one carries the case.” On their question we tie; on ours they forfeit.
We never name them. The category does the work; naming a typist only promotes it to rival.
The asymmetries are defensive. This ladder is what compounds — each rung an order of magnitude harder to follow, and each out of reach for a vendor that has promised to forget.
Refuse their metric. Not “documentation time saved” but blocks completed inside validity, extensions granted first-pass, reports out before the physician visit. The director view already speaks it: saved minutes are waitlist capacity — children seen sooner.
Every consented, completed block teaches the expected-progress corridor for a goal profile. A thousand blocks in, Ergomania knows what week 6 of 18 looks like for a seven-year-old with graphomotor goals — the field's first empirical pacing reference. No later entrant can have it.
Report formats tuned per payer grammar — IV vs KVG, GKV, Blankoverordnung — until extension approval on first submission becomes our benchmark stat. The report that renews itself.
The physician side: a structured Verlaufsbericht arrives, the renewal leaves in one click. Schools and parents join through consent-gated views. Practices adopt because their physicians already have — the loop sells the seats.
Outcome benchmarks and documentation standards co-authored with ergo associations (ErgotherapieSuisse, DVE) and FH programs; mentor mode becomes how new graduates learn to reason about a block. When the field's reference numbers are ours, catching up stops being a product question.
Templates without a spine. The gap was never content — their system has no model of a prescription to hang content on.
Breaks the zero-retention promise their sales story is built on, triggers re-consent under revDSG/GDPR — and still yields text, not structured blocks.
Years of integrating a text engine with a billing-first scheduling database — while the clinical model still belongs to neither.
Forfeits the horizontal economics that fund them — and starts from zero against an archive we already encode: EIP, Session-Planning SOP, OTVS.
The moat argument earns nothing until we match what they already do well. Five debts, none optional: