Looking to partner with teams to validate a real workflow problem
I’m building OMNEX, an early-stage workspace focused on reducing context loss across email, chat, documents, meetings, and tasks. It started as an internal tool and is now in a small beta while I validate where it creates real pull.
I’m not looking for generic users right now — I’m looking to partner with a few teams or builders who want to test something early and shape it together.
What partnership looks like
• You use OMNEX in real work (solo or with a small team)
• You give direct, honest feedback on what helps and what doesn’t
• You influence priorities and features based on actual workflows
• No contracts, no sales pressure, no pricing during beta
Who this might fit
• Founders or early-stage teams
• Operators / PMs dealing with async work and handoffs
• Developers juggling multiple tools and threads
• Anyone frustrated by spending time reconstructing context before doing work
The goal is simple: figure out whether this solves a real problem well enough to build a serious product around it.
If you’re interested in partnering for early validation, you can check it out here:
👉 https://omnex.tech
Or comment here and I’ll reach out directly.
This feels like a solid early-stage validation ask — focusing on context loss across tools (email, docs, meetings, tasks) is a real pain point for many teams, and using a real workspace in real work is the strongest way to test it.
One thing I’ve noticed with early workflow partnerships is that friction happens not just at handoffs, but when people aren’t sure what happened last or what needs doing next. If OMNEX can make that transition clearer — not just aggregate info but signal where the next action should happen — it becomes much more valuable to teams juggling async threads and interruptions.
Curious — for others here: when you’re testing early workflow tools, what’s the one behavior or signal you watch first to judge whether it actually reduced context loss (e.g., fewer clarifications needed, faster task handoffs, shorter meeting follow-ups)? That kind of insight can help shape what matters most in validation.
It looks great, but unfortunately, I'm just part of a small team of four.
Totally fair — and honestly, small teams are actually some of the best environments to validate this.
A lot of the context-loss problems we’re studying show up even more clearly in teams of 3–5 people, especially when everyone wears multiple hats.
If you’re ever curious, OMNEX works just as well for small teams and we’re actively learning from setups like yours. No pressure at all — just appreciate you taking a look and sharing the context