Assistants that know when to hand over

Customer and internal chatbots grounded in your content, with honest escalation to a human and reporting on what they could not answer.

Why people hate chatbots, and how not to build one

People do not hate chatbots. They hate chatbots that will not let them reach a person, and chatbots that answer confidently and wrongly.

Both are design choices. We build assistants that answer from your own documented content, say so plainly when they do not know, and escalate with the whole conversation attached so the customer never repeats themselves. The report on what it could not answer is often more valuable than the deflection rate.

Who this is for

If one of these sounds like your situation, it is worth a conversation.

Support answering the same things

A large share of contacts are questions already answered in your help centre.

Out-of-hours enquiries

People asking at nine in the evening and hearing nothing until morning.

Staff searching internal docs

The same policy questions asked of the same colleague every week.

How we keep it honest

The difference between a model that helps and one that quietly misleads.

A baseline before a model

We measure how well the current process does first. Surprisingly often it is the thing to beat, and sometimes it wins.

Evaluated on data it has never seen

Held-out, time-split where time matters. An accuracy figure from the training set is not a result.

A human in the loop where it counts

Confident cases go through; uncertain ones go to a person. That boundary is set by you, not by us.

Monitored after launch

Data drifts, behaviour changes, accuracy decays. You get the alerting, not just the model.

Part of AI & Data

Part of AI & Data

AI that survives contact with your data

Machine learning, generative AI, automation and analytics — applied to problems where the numbers justify it, and measured after launch.

See all AI & Data services
What we commit to

What we commit to

  • A written recommendation not to proceed, where that is the honest answer
  • Accuracy reported on held-out data, with the failure cases shown
  • Your data stays yours — never used to train anything we sell elsewhere
  • A documented fallback for when the model is unavailable or unsure
  • Running costs estimated before you commit, not discovered on the first bill
How an AI project runs

How an AI project runs

Deliberately front-loaded with the question of whether to proceed at all.

Feasibility

We look at your actual data, establish the baseline, and give you a straight answer on whether this is worth building. Some of these end in "do not".

Prototype

A working model measured against the baseline on held-out data, with the error cases in front of you rather than averaged away.

Production

Integration into the system where the decision is actually made, with the human-review boundary, logging and rollback in place.

Monitoring

Drift detection, periodic re-evaluation, and retraining when the numbers say so rather than on a calendar.

Common questions

Always, and quickly. The escalation carries the whole conversation so nobody repeats themselves. Trapping people is why chatbots have the reputation they do.

It answers only from your documented content and says so plainly when it does not know. We also sample transcripts weekly at first, so mistakes are caught by you rather than by a customer.

Yes — website, WhatsApp or inside your helpdesk. Same knowledge, whichever door the customer uses.

Is this the right fit?

Tell us what you are trying to do. If AI chatbots is not the answer, we will say so.

Get in touch
Contact us