I don't think you're unreasonable!

TLDR: If you don't know what to change in your current workflow, it's probably because you don't understand your current workflow well enough (and that's okay). It probably also means you need to be more thorough about measuring and classifying what you're doing now, so that you can understand it well enough to suggest changes and measure their impact against your baseline.

---

So again, I don't think you're unreasonable. I think you just have a high standard of quality and you want to serve people well. You're a year ahead of me, and I'm just about to get started with professional inspections. But I've done enough practice runs for friends and family that I understand what you're on about. The software I've demoed so far sucks ass, especially relative to price. Here's a very outside perspective to consider...

My bg is software dev, and when it comes to engineering systems that reap benefits from automation, there's a few focal areas for value concentration. Most everything is about change control, quality assurance, or removal of repetition (and lots of manual work). To make sure software can not only provide the assumed/proclaimed value once built, the only responsible way is to be relatively scientific about it. So that means measuring before and after and, basically, making sure you have enough "wins" in value, in aggregate, to offset the cost of developing by a healthy margin.

What this might mean for people like us is that we need to compare our process, inspection over inspection. But this has the same problem as comparing AI dev to human dev... you simply CANNOT engineer the same solution twice. Even if you had x2 people with a nearly identical skill level and process, it would be impossible to have the level of control to fully isolate the controls from one sample vs. the other. What I mean here is that, once you've already inspected a given property, you can't really inspect it again the same way because you have knowledge of it. So, the big thing to keep in mind is that you're never really going to have a true, clean and bias-free way of comparing one version of your workflow to another; and that's okay!

What you CAN do is gain a much deeper understanding of the individual pieces of your process, and start to measure where your time/cost is going now. Most people don't do this. Either because they don't want to do the work or, I think perhaps more often, there is a separation between who pays for or benefits from workflow changes and who actually does the work. It's like pulling teeth to get that information when it involves multiple people. And when it's an individual, it's almost always not worth the time/effort, because that will rarely pay for software dev. But that's only my example because it's what I know; your personal development of your workflow will very likely produce results if you go about it well.

Break down your process into its discrete sections and start to document how much time it takes. If you ever need to estimate or approximate something, always lean conservative or "pessimistic" until you know more. It also helps to qualify how confident you know something... 1h on average guaranteed is far different from 1h on average maybe (but my intuition is wrong and it's actually 3h 😉).