A university employee should not need to understand the university’s software architecture to ask for help. Yet every extra service portal quietly demands that knowledge. Is this a technology request? A facilities problem? Something for human resources? Before anyone fixes the problem, the employee has to solve the filing system.
At Ânima Educação, acquisitions had left five service-desk tools handling internal requests. Departments had their own workflows; employees faced different interfaces. Five tools also meant five licensing and maintenance contracts. LEVTY, a Brazilian engineering services company, helped turn that collection into a shared entrance. The useful question is how an organization changes its plumbing while everyone is still turning on the taps.
- The work: dedicated engineering teams, deeply versed in SYDLE ONE.
- The example: five Ânima service platforms consolidated in stages.
- The payoff: roughly 80% lower internal service-center operating costs, according to the published customer case.
Five tools, one very ordinary problem
A separate tool can look sensible from inside a department. It has the right forms, familiar permissions and a team that knows its quirks. The trouble becomes visible from the other side of the counter. Someone requesting help experiences the collection as an obstacle course.
That is what makes Ânima’s example instructive. Consolidation addressed governance and service quality as well as software expense. The resulting portal brought together more than 400 services and knowledge resources. Its reported scale: over 30,000 active requesters, over 1,000 people resolving requests and about 3,000 tickets opened daily. These are the working dimensions of one customer’s service desk.
The migration was the product
The first wave covered technology and facilities, from October through December 2023. LEVTY describes a demanding technical assignment under a short deadline, with user training and adaptation happening alongside development. The new service desk reached production; a month of validation and assisted operation followed before the next departmental migration.
Human resources came next, followed by academic services, finance and procurement, then legal. The last stage finished in January 2025. Open tickets moved too. Azure AD integration, single sign-on, approval workflows and connections to external systems helped make the new entrance usable within the existing organization. A clean screen without those connections would merely relocate the inconvenience.
Readers can borrow the sequence: move a bounded service, check stability, watch how people use it, then retire the next tool. Keeping an old system alive forever preserves its expense and confusion. Retiring it too early transfers the risk to employees. The gap between those decisions is where implementation teams earn their keep.
The savings figure deserves a precise reading. It concerns operating the internal service center, rather than all of Ânima’s technology spending. Removing overlapping licenses and maintenance agreements offers a plausible mechanism for that reduction. It does not, by itself, calculate the migration’s payback period. A purchasing team still needs implementation costs, future support commitments and a clear baseline before borrowing the percentage for its own business case.
A specialist, with a platform attached
LEVTY’s offer is a dedicated team that works alongside a customer’s staff, learns its business rules and builds, improves and supports digital products. Its particular expertise is SYDLE ONE implementation. SYDLE makes the platform. LEVTY supplies the engineering and operational attention required to fit it to an organization.
The distinction matters when shopping. A platform subscription buys capabilities. A team must decide how those capabilities serve actual work. LEVTY sits between the software vendor and the customer’s internal technology organization. Alternatives include building the capacity internally or hiring another implementation provider. Comparing those options means comparing responsibility and accumulated knowledge as well as hourly rates.
For a prospective customer, a useful evaluation would begin with one awkward workflow. Ask how a request crosses departments, where its history lives and what happens when an approval stalls. Then ask who will maintain the answer six months later. These questions turn a broad transformation pitch into a concrete delivery discussion. They also expose whether a dedicated team has enough access to the people who actually run the process.
The company advertises applications spanning business processes, documents, customer relationships, analytics and AI. Alloha supplies another concrete example: its testimonial describes migrating billing and CRM across nine operations. The recurring problem is organizational variety. A common platform is useful only when somebody understands the differences it must accommodate.
“Agility values continuous evolution.”
BRUNO VAZ / LEVTY HEAD OF OPERATIONS
Translated from Portuguese, SYDLE event remarks
The price of making it real
Public procurement puts numbers beside this work. In September 2024, Brazil’s industrial-property institute, INPI, contracted LEVTY for SYDLE ONE licensing, patent-workflow implementation and training over 60 months. The original value was about R$12.47 million. A November 2025 amendment added two mid-level developer positions and recorded an updated total of R$15.20 million. Contract value describes a commitment, not money already paid.
The timetable supplies an equally useful lesson. Government monitoring recorded the broader BPMS program at 28% implementation against a 40% target for 2024. It cited procurement and technical complexity, difficult specification and the need for new internal skills. Those findings describe program constraints; they do not establish that LEVTY caused the shortfall.
A buyer should therefore budget for decisions as well as development. Someone must define exceptions, approve changes and own the process after launch. Platform expertise cannot substitute for that participation. Consolidation also concentrates dependence: the common system and its support become more consequential. For an organization unwilling to standardize workflows, that bargain can be uncomfortable.
The people behind the portal
LEVTY recruits around six hubs in Minas Gerais. Its careers material names collaboration, quality, self-management and transparency; its trainee program reports that more than 90% of participants receive promotions at completion. Those are company claims, but they explain the operating ambition: develop people who can keep learning a customer’s business.
That ambition fits the Ânima story. After the departmental migrations, the work continued, including student services and document analysis using AI. The durable lesson is pleasingly practical. Count the doors people must open to get something done. Then ask whether the organization can make one entrance work properly. LEVTY’s business begins with that second question.