One model, one data source, one team, hard-wired. The second use case starts over. Real load finds the parts nobody sized, and every integration is bespoke.
The pilot hard-wired one model, one data source and one team. The second use case means starting over, and the third waits for the second.
What served ten people in a demo queues at a hundred. Nobody sized it, because nobody designed it.
The CRM connector was written for the pilot. The ERP one for the next project. Neither shares a line, and both break when the API changes.
We design the system: which model runs where, how data moves and where it may not go, how systems connect, who may see what. One document, reviewed with your engineers, that the build follows.
Three views of the same system, each one reviewed with your team.
The parts and how they talk.
Where data lives, moves and stops.
Chosen for the constraint, with the alternative named.
Four phases, from what you have to a design the build follows.
Systems, data, rules and the projects ahead.
The three views, drafted and reviewed.
How the design becomes a system.
The design in the room while it is built.
Faster second projects, a system that holds at load, and a design an auditor can read.
Connectors, authentication and logging are shared. Each new use case adds its logic and reuses the rest.
Load, latency and cost estimated in the design and checked in the build. The queue at 9 a.m. is a design question answered early.
Data paths and permissions are drawn and enforced. When legal or the auditor asks where the data goes, the design is the answer.
| Side by side | Project by project | On a design |
|---|---|---|
| Second project | Starts over | Reuses connectors, auth, logging |
| Load | Discovered in production | Sized in the design, checked in the build |
| Maintenance | One bespoke integration per project | Shared parts, fixed once |
| Integration | Written for the demo | Under the rules your systems already enforce |
| Changing a model or vendor | A rewrite | A swap behind an interface |
Architecture decides what the system is before code decides it by accident. The output is a document: components, interfaces, data paths, permissions, the stack and the reasons. The build follows it, and the engineers who build it have reviewed it. Without that step, the first implementation becomes the design, whether it was a good one or not.
For a first AI system in a mid-sized company, discovery and design typically fit in a few weeks, with the review cycles depending on how quickly your engineers and security can meet. We fix the timeline and the price after the first discovery week, when the scope is known.
That is the point. The design starts from your ERP, CRM, identity provider and data platform, and prefers tools your engineers already operate. New components are added where the existing ones cannot do the job, and each addition is written down with the reason.
Your engineers review every draft and sign off the final one, so the design is theirs before the build starts. During the build we review implementation against it together, and the document is updated when reality changes it. At handover they own the system and the document that describes it.
We are a small team of senior specialists. We pick the right model and the right layer, and we build the least machinery that does the job. You get a call with an engineer, not a sales deck.
