Borosil had plenty of data. What it needed was a usable answer. The glassware business had information scattered across departments and systems, with manual reports slowing decisions. In Navsoft’s account of the project, the first intervention was almost stubbornly practical: collect the records, clean them and put them on a common foundation. Only then came the conversational AI.
- Navsoft builds software and connects the systems businesses already own.
- Its customers buy help with commerce, operations, customer relationships and data.
- The transferable idea: repair the handoff before automating the conversation.
That sequence explains more about Navsoft than a long list of technologies would. Enterprise AI is usually presented from the front: a question typed into a box, an answer arriving like room service. Navsoft’s work invites a look through the service entrance. Somebody has to make the information usable before the answer can be useful.
The problem between the purchases
Consider Primex, which makes synchronized clocks and environmental monitoring systems. Its trouble was wonderfully specific. Customer orders and invoice details were not synchronized; Zendesk was not integrated with NetSuite. Lead management, quotes, service cases and recurring billing all needed attention. Each application could have a purpose while the overall process remained awkward.
Navsoft implemented Salesforce capabilities and integrated the surrounding systems. This is the company’s territory: the gap between buying software and having a business that runs coherently through it. Its services include ERP and CRM consulting, custom applications, cloud infrastructure, product engineering and dedicated development teams. Customers can commission a new application or ask it to connect and improve existing ones.
That puts Navsoft alongside software consultancies, specialist implementation partners and internal engineering teams. Its stated proposition is breadth: one supplier spanning enterprise platforms, commerce and AI. That breadth is useful when a problem crosses departmental boundaries. A buyer still has to assess the particular delivery team and its experience with the systems involved.
Before AI, a telephone line
Priyanka Rungta started Navsoft in 1999, aged 24. In a 2015 interview, she recalled an earlier obstacle: potential customers who did not see why they needed web applications. Finding developers was difficult, and unreliable internet access complicated delivery. Her account included the remarkable detail of somebody having to stay at the internet provider’s office to keep the connection working.
“In those days, clients didn’t understand the need of web applications.”Priyanka Rungta, speaking to KNN in 2015
Customer resistance helped push the business toward the United States and United Kingdom, she said. The company followed demand abroad. She also described funding growth from the business’s own earnings. It is a useful origin story because the constraint was adoption as much as technology: could someone recognize the value, purchase it and use it?
A bid is a better test than a buzzword
At furniture manufacturer Durian, the bottleneck was tendering. Staff had to inspect hundreds of pages for requirements, determine eligibility and assemble documents. Navsoft built BidBuddy to analyze tenders and prepare bid packages after approval. Its published case study reports a reduction from seven days to seven minutes, plus 50 percent cost savings. Those are Navsoft’s reported outcomes, specific to this implementation.
A workflow comparison, not a promise that every tender takes seven minutes.
The interesting design choice is the approved bid. Document analysis and preparation sit inside a decision process. For a buyer evaluating similar software, that suggests a concrete demonstration: bring a real tender, check the eligibility findings and inspect the resulting package. Speed matters only if the work survives that inspection.
Borosil illustrates a different use. After preparing its data, Navsoft deployed NavAI so executives could ask questions in ordinary language; the account also describes recommendations and product bundles. Navsoft reports a seven percent sales uplift in fifteen days. The practical lesson is the order of operations. A friendly interface depends on the records underneath it.
The catalog has a back office
Navsoft’s product range also includes product information management, or PIM, and an order management system, or OMS. PIM organizes what a merchant knows about its products. OMS brings together orders, fulfillment and returns. These are useful places to look if selling across channels has left staff reconciling information by hand.
NavAI adds conversational analytics and forecasting to that enterprise work. Its current product site also presents vision AI and custom agents. The family resemblance is operational: help people use information already sitting in their business, whether it describes a customer, an order or a production process.
Budget for the handover
Commercially, this is a services relationship with products in the mix. Navsoft’s published method starts with requirements and a proposal covering scope, timing, costs and staffing. Contract agreement and an advance precede delivery. Clutch lists a $10,000 minimum project and $25–$49 hourly rates. Treat those as a directory starting point; integrations, migration and support belong in the actual proposal.
Customer reviews there supply a useful wrinkle. Some request more training or quicker design feedback. Software delivery leaves people with new responsibilities, and a handover needs to cover them. A buyer should price staff training and future adjustments alongside the build.
The approach fits organizations with valuable systems that need connecting and workflows worth improving. A small operation adequately served by standard software may have little reason to commission custom integration. Fragmented definitions, restricted data access or an unwilling team also limit what a conversational interface can accomplish.
NavAI’s October 2026 Theisen’s case study returns to the same ground: finance systems, reconciliations and a shared view of records. For readers, the useful starting point is modest. Find one place where employees copy information between systems. Measure the delay. Decide what both sides need to know. Then give the software something worthwhile to say.