Mistro is a business management system for the portable storage and trailer industry, focused on saving time simply. Our system allows you to reduce double entry across business tools.

1. Streamlining
Success
Mistro vs. Chaos - A Tale of Time
Savings in the Portable Storage Industry

2. TYPE
ON
A
PATH
Abstract
This case study examines
potential time-saving benefits
of adopting Mistro, an all-in-one
business management solution
for portable storage
businesses. Case study focus is
centered around Apple Mobile
Leasing (AML), a family-owned
portable storage business
considering a switch to Mistro,
evaluating whether Mistro
offers greater time savings
compared to AML’s current
toolset, which includes
Microsoft Office, Salesforce and
Trello. Through a
methodology involving timed
input trials, model creation and
comparative analysis, time
commitment is quantified around
both approaches. Analysis reveals
transitioning to Mistro can result in
a 32% time-saving benefit,
reducing order management time.
Findings emphasize efficiency and
productivity gains possible with
Mistro, but also highlight a need for
further research. Insights derived
are suitable for portable storage
decision-makers, assisting them in
making informed choices regarding
business management solutions
and optimizing their operations for
improved time management and
productivity.

3. In today’s fast-paced and
competitive business environment,
time is a precious resource which
can significantly impact productivity
and success. Recognizing this need,
Mistro has developed a
comprehensive solution to help
portable storage businesses
streamline their operations and
save time from a single tab.
To evaluate potential
time-saving advantages of adopting
Mistro, we conducted a thorough
comparison between Mistro and
traditional business management
methods. By assessing efficiency
and effectiveness of Mistro’s
features, we sought time
quantification of Mistro
embracement.
Through data examination, we
intend to highlight potential
advantages and efficiencies gained
by portable storage businesses who
choose to embrace Mistro. With
time quantification and efficiency
exploration, this case study seeks to
inform and empower
decision-makers to make
well-informed choices regarding
their business management
Introduction
solutions.

4. Case Description
Apple Mobile Leasing (AML) is
a family-owned
portable storage business based
in Ohio. As a single-location
operation, they have been
providing reliable and efficient
storage solutions to customers
in their region. However, with
evolving industry demands, AML
is considering a switch to Mistro,
an all-in-one business
management solution.
Currently, AML relies on a
combination of Microsoft Office,
Salesforce and Trello to
manage their orders and
coordinate moves. While these
tools have served them
adequately, AML recognizes
potential benefits of adopting
Mistro for their day-to-day
operations.
In order to assess time-sav-
ing advantages associated with
switching to Mistro, our case
study aims to analyze
transitional impact on AML’s
efficiency and overall
management processes. By
conducting a comprehensive
examination, we aim to quantify
time saved by utilizing Mistro’s
consolidated features and
evaluate its suitability for their
specific business needs.
Through our study, we will
compare existing tools and
processes employed by AML
with integrated functionalities
offered by Mistro. By collecting
data on time spent during
input sessions for order
initiation, we aim to
demonstrate potential time
savings which can be achieved
through Mistro adoption.
Findings derived will assist
AML in making an informed
decision regarding Mistro
adoption, while also serving as a
resource for other portable
storage businesses
contemplating a shift to an
all-in-one solution.

5. Problem Statement
Time efficiency and
productivity are centered
around this case study’s
research question: Does Mistro
provide a higher level of time
savings extrapolated over one
year versus AML’s current stack?
Ultimately, this question seeks
to provide clarity on whether
transitioning to Mistro will
offer AML a significant
advantage in terms of time
efficiency and productivity.
Research findings will inform
AML’s decision-making process
and enable them to make an
informed choice regarding
Mistro as their preferred
business management solution.

6. Methodology
Methodology to conduct a
comprehensive analysis of
associated time-saving benefits
with Mistro adoption compared
to AML’s current toolset
included:
Timed Input Trials
Timed input trials were
conducted to measure time
spent on various tasks using
AML’s existing tools, including
Microsoft Office, Salesforce and
Trello. Timing was recorded
using Clockify, a time-tracking
software, which allowed for
accurate measurement of task
duration.
Model Creation
A model was developed to
extrapolate time spent on one
order and estimate total time
expended over one year. This
estimation was based on
number of orders generated by
AML with in one year. By
capturing time spent on one
order and scaling it up to
reflect annual workload, model
estimates provided time
commitment requirement for
using AML’s current stack.
Definition of Input Session
An input session was defined as
any time spent filling out forms
or engaging with tools
related to order management.
This encompassed time invested
in Microsoft Office, Salesforce or
Trello, as these tools are integral
to AML’s current workflow. By
establishing this definition, it
became possible to quantify
time associated with each input
session and compare it to
Mistro’s streamlined approach.
Comparative Analysis
Data collection from timed input
trials were analyzed and
compared to evaluate time
saving potential. Time spent on
order-related tasks within AML’s
existing stack was compared to
time estimates required if they
were to switch to Mistro, which
allowed for a direct comparison
of time efficiencies associated
with each approach.

7. Methodology
By employing these
methodological steps, this
case study aimed to provide
a quantitative assessment of
time-saving benefits Mistro
offers in contrast to AML’s
current toolset.

8. Analysis
Input sessions conducted over
a span of one month provided
valuable insights into time
requirements for order
management using AML’s
current stack and Mistro.
Analysis of recorded sessions
included:
Recorded Input Sessions
Session 1: Three orders were
generated during session one.
Session 2: Six orders were
generated during session two.
Session 3: Two orders were
generated during session three.
Total Orders: 11 orders were
generated in total.
Mean Time per Session
To analyze time spent per
order, mean time from total
orders was calculated. This
3-point analysis provided an
understanding of average time
taken to complete one order
within AML’s current stack.
Baseline Comparison with
Mistro
To establish a baseline for
comparison, five separate input
sessions were conducted to
derive time required to
complete one order. Analysis
showed it took approximately
two minutes to complete one
order in Mistro.
Recorded input sessions
coupled with Mistro’s
baseline comparison offer a
preliminary understanding of
time requirements for order
management in both
scenarios. However, it is
important to note: a
comprehensive analysis would
benefit from additional data
points and a more detailed
breakdown of time spent on
various tasks within AML’s
current stack.

9. Analysis
Additionally, exploring
reasons behind any observed
variations in time spent per
order, identifying potential
bottlenecks or inefficiencies
within AML’s current stack and
assessing specific features and
functionalities of Mistro which
contribute to time savings
would provide a more
comprehensive analysis.
Overall, data highlights potential
for time savings when utilizing
Mistro for order management.

10. Results and Findings
Analysis of time-saving
benefits associated with
adopting Mistro compared to
AML’s current stack over one
year’s span yielded:
Time Required in AML’s
Current Stack
Through timed input trials and
extrapolation of orders
generated in one year, AML’s
current stack required
approximately 47 hours.
Time Required in Mistro
In contrast, analysis revealed
using Mistro for input sessions
resulted in a significantly lower
time commitment. Time
estimates required for input
sessions on Mistro was found to
be approximately 31 hours.
Percentage Difference in
Time Saved
Comparison between AML’s
current stack and Mistro
showcased a notable difference
in time efficiency. Data revealed
by transitioning to Mistro, a
time-saving benefit of 32% could
be achieved. This percentage
difference represents time
reduction required to complete
input sessions when utilizing
Mistro compared to AML’s
existing toolset.
Findings highlight
substantial time-saving
potential of adopting Mistro
as a all-in-one business
management solution.
Analysis demonstrates
businesses, such as AML, can
benefit from a streamlined
approach to order
management and related
tasks by leveraging Mistro’s
integrated functionalities.

11. Results and Findings
By quantifying time
savings associated with Mis-
tro, this case study provides
valuable insights for deci-
sion-makers and underscores
advantages of adopting a
comprehensive platform like
Mistro for
portable storage businesses.
Significance in time
commitment reduction, as
evidenced by a 32%
difference, emphasizes
productivity potential,
enhanced operational
efficiency and overall time
management benefits by
switching to Mistro.
Figure 1. Extrapolated hours in a year spent on input sessions between AML’s current stack and
Mistro

12. Discussion
Case study findings provide
valuable insights into
potential time-saving benefits of
adopting an all-in-one
solution like Mistro for business
management. However, several
important considerations and
limitations emerge, leading to
a discussion of implications for
further research opportunities:
All-in-One Solutions and
Workflow
While all-in-one solutions like
Mistro offer consolidation
advantages into a single
platform, it is important to
acknowledge they may not
always align perfectly with
specific workflow requirements.
There may be instances where
other specialized tools are
better suited for certain tasks.
Organizations should
carefully evaluate their unique
needs and consider a balance
between all-in-one solutions and
targeted tools to optimize their
workflow.
Further Research Need
To gain a more comprehensive
understanding of toolset
effectiveness for managing
portable storage businesses,
further research is warranted.
Future studies could delve
deeper into AML’s current stack
to identify specific pain points,
explore alternative toolsets
used by other businesses and
evaluate their efficacy in
improving productivity and time
management. Such research
could provide valuable insights
for businesses seeking to
enhance their operations and
make informed decisions
regarding tool selection.

13. Discussion
Model Limitations
Model implementation for this
case study to estimate time
savings has certain limitations
which should be acknowledged.
Firstly, preexisting data
requirements - meaning a
minimum of one year’s worth of
data is necessary for
accurate predictions.
Secondly, this model lacks
individualization as it takes a
holistic business view.
However, it is important to
recognize individual users who
may have different speeds and
efficiencies during input
sessions.
To create a more
accurate model, future research
could explore removing yearly
variables and applying
equations to each individual
order, allowing for a more
personalized analysis.

14. Conclusion
Exploration of time saving
potential demonstrated
transitioning from AML’s current
toolset to Mistro could result in
significant time savings. Analysis
revealed AML’s current stack
required approximately 47
hours to complete input
sessions over a year,
whereas using Mistro reduced
time commitment to
approximately 31 hours,
representing a 32% time-saving
benefit. These results highlight
efficiency and streamlined
workflow offered by Mistro for
order management tasks.
However, it is important to
consider all-in-one solutions
may not always align perfectly
with specific workflow
requirements; further research
is needed to explore alternative
toolsets and evaluate their
efficacy. Additionally, model
limitations, including insufficient
preexisting data and a lack of
individualization, should be
taken into account. Overall,
findings emphasize potential for
all-in-one solutions like Mistro to
enhance productivity and
optimize operations.