We teach your staff how these tools actually work, find where your week is leaking, and build the fixes alongside them, so your program owns what gets built and you spend the season on the field, in the pool, on the track.
Non-revenue programs run lean. A coach is also the recruiter, the compliance officer, the academic liaison, the travel coordinator, and more. The work piles up in spreadsheets, inboxes, and PDFs nobody has time to maintain.
People who actually use these tools at work get hours back every week. That part is well documented. The catch is that most people handed the tools never get there.
About 2 hrsa week, back, for one person who actually uses these tools at work
That's 5% of a working week, from a nationally representative US study of people using AI in real jobs. A second large study puts it lower. Neither was run by a vendor. An estimate, not a guarantee.
It comes off the written work that repeats: the recruiting emails, the drafts, the routine requests that land in an inbox every single week.
What that adds up to on a staff
~6 hrs
a week · 3 coaches
~10 hrs
a week · 5 coaches
~16 hrs
a week · 8 coaches
Every coach who uses them, every week.
6 in 10
People handed one of these tools never became regular users of it. The hours above are real and documented. Most programs never collect those hours, not because the tools don't work, but because nobody was ever taught to use them. That gap is the entire job.
Among people who use AI at work, self-reported time savings averaged 5.4% of work hours, roughly 2.2 hours in a 40-hour week (Bick, Blandin & Deming, “The Rapid Adoption of Generative AI”, NBER WP 32966 / Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; nationally representative US survey). A second large study puts the figure lower, at 2.8% of work hours or about 1.1 hours (Humlum & Vestergaard, NBER WP 33777; 25,000+ workers across 7,000 Danish workplaces, linked to administrative records). The defensible range is therefore about 1 to 2 hours per week per user; we display the upper study and round it down to two. Neither study was run by a vendor.
Two hours per person, multiplied by headcount, rounded down from the 2.2 hours the study reports. The multiplication assumes every coach on staff becomes a regular user, which is exactly what usually doesn't happen, and the reason the adoption figure sits next to it. Both savings figures also assume a 40-hour week; in-season weeks routinely run well past that, which these numbers do not account for.
Drafting and writing show the largest measured gains: task completion time fell 40% and rated quality rose 18% in a randomized trial of 453 professionals (Noy & Zhang, Science, 2023). Routine requests and triage showed 14% more resolved per hour, rising to 34% for the least experienced staff, across 5,179 support agents (Brynjolfsson, Li & Raymond, NBER WP 31161). Email savings ran to more than half an hour a week for regular users. All measured, not self-reported. The same email trial found no significant reduction in meeting time, and no clean figure exists for data entry or reporting, which is why this page doesn't claim savings on scheduling or logistics. That trial (Dillon, Jaffe, Peng & Cambon, “Early Impacts of M365 Copilot”, 2025; 6,000+ workers at 56 firms) was run by Microsoft, which makes the product it tested.
In that same trial, only about 40% of workers handed a license went on to use the tool regularly; the remaining ~60% is the figure quoted above. Adoption is what the research supports as the lever. No study isolates how much time training itself saves, so we don't claim one.
Both headline figures are self-reported and may exceed what could be measured objectively; the Danish study found no detectable change in recorded working hours despite users reporting savings. Nobody has yet measured a worker's total weekly hours saved with objective instrumentation.
We meet your program where it is: same tools, same staff, same systems. The difference is what you’re left with: a staff that knows how the thing works and can change it without calling us.
Before we automate anything, you learn the tools. No jargon, no slide deck you'll never reopen. Just you, your laptop, and one real piece of your own work. No prior experience assumed.
We sit down with how your program actually works, not a template, and come out with a short list: what to automate first, what to speed up, what to leave alone.
We build the tool with your staff, not for them, so they can watch it come together and ask questions along the way. When we're done, they know how it works and how to change it.
The audit turned it up, and we built this one alongside their staff. Upload a tournament schedule, and it automatically cross-references their recruit list and figures out which recruits to watch and when. No more manual scheduling. The coach just reviews and goes. And their staff can open it up and change it themselves.
Lynio was started by an assistant coach for 10 years turned software developer who got tired of watching coaches do administrative work instead of coaching.
We work exclusively with non-revenue programs: track & field, swimming & diving, field hockey, soccer, lacrosse, and the rest. Small staffs, big rosters, every minute counts.
We are intentionally small. We take on a handful of programs at a time, and we'd rather leave behind a staff that doesn't need us than a program that can't run without us.
Tell us about your program. We'll follow up within one business day to chat further and see where we'd start.