Last year's AI budget is spent. Nobody can say what it returned.
AI investment the board can audit.
A baseline in hours and euros before anything is built, one KPI per initiative fixed up front, and systems that report their own return every month.
Outcomes first. We start with the problem, agree what solving it is worth in hours and euros, and fix the measure before anything is built. If an AI investment cannot show its return, the board is right to ask.
Does this sound familiar?
These are the bottlenecks we hear most often:
- Nobody owns the number that says whether last year's AI spend worked.
- AI budget is approved on intent, then never measured against it.
- Every initiative arrives with its own definition of success.
- Data quality stops every AI initiative before it reaches production.
How we work
Baseline first
What the process costs you today, in hours and in euros, agreed before anyone builds anything.
One KPI per initiative, fixed up front
A single measurable outcome the board can steer on, set before the build rather than argued afterwards.
Measured in production
The system reports its own return every month, against the baseline you agreed.
What you get when you engage
Three weeks, one working agent and a business case the board can read.
Agentic Readiness is three weeks on your own data. We take the process with the highest manual load, measure what it costs you today in hours and euros, and test whether your systems will carry an agent against it. Where they will, we build one and hand you a business case with the KPI it moves and a fixed price for the build. Where they will not yet, you get the specific reason and what to fix first. Either way, the numbers decide what happens next.
Where this leads
Two routes. Most organisations need both in the end, but one of them is your first move. Take the first if your systems cannot agree on a number, because nothing built on top of them will hold. Take the second if the data is sound and it is the manual work that costs you. Either way you commit one stage at a time, each stage leaves you something you can use whether or not you go on, and nothing ties you to a platform we recommend.
Your operation on a unified architecture
Assets, units, leases, tenants and contracts defined once. Your systems connected so the next tool is weeks of work, not a quarter. The core platform chosen on evidence from your own portfolio. Occupancy, arrears and valuation get one answer, and the integration quote stops being a reason to say no.
- Architecture Assessment Start here3 weeks. Systems, integration debt, data model, shortlist.
- Proof of conceptAn 8-week gated proof of concept on your shortlisted platform or target architecture, before you sign anything.
- Build-outA composed architecture or a vertical platform, whichever the proof supports.
- Managed ServicesWe run it under a 12 to 24 month term, if your team does not have the capacity.
Agents doing the work in your operation
Production agents that read your source systems, reconcile the figures and prepare the work your team approves, inside governance guardrails. The month-end that took a week of senior people's time now takes minutes, with every action logged.
- Agentic Readiness Start hereThree weeks. One working agent on your own data, or the reason there is not one yet.
- Agent Development6 to 12 weeks. Two or three production agents, reporting first.
- Managed ServicesWe run it under a 12 to 24 month term, if your team does not have the capacity.
What we have done in real estate
Three engagements, one for each step of the ladder, and what each one settled.
Agentic Readiness, for a European property software vendor
Every new client was configured by hand, from knowledge in consultants' heads. In a few weeks we built a working agent against their live platform, using standards derived from their own past implementations. Their consultants judged the standard and output good enough to take over much of the work. They left with the agent, the evidence, and a rollout plan.
Architecture Assessment, for a pan-European real estate organisation
A core platform was about to be chosen with no picture of what it had to fit into. We designed the target architecture first, then scanned the market against it: an independent shortlist with a cost range per option, where quotes for the same scope differed by a factor of three. The board got a shortlist it could defend and the figures behind its business case.
Agent Development, for a proptech platform
Tenant and back-office agents on a live portfolio, connected to the property management and service ticket systems. Answers are benchmarked before release and monitored after, each agent sees only what the person asking may see, and GDPR and the AI Act are designed in. Tenants get answers at any hour; the team gets the exceptions and a record of every action.
Three starting points, one discipline: prove the output on real data before building the plumbing, keep what the existing systems can carry, and the same people from first session to handover.
Based in the Netherlands and built for European enterprises: data sovereignty, GDPR and AI Act compliance from day one.
Three weeks, one working agent and a business case
Start with a 30-minute working session. Then three weeks, fixed scope and fixed price: we take your costliest process, measure it, and test whether your systems will carry an agent against it. Where they will, you get the agent, the business case and a price for the build. Where they will not yet, you get the reason and what to fix first.
Independent. We recommend what works, not what we sell.
Thank you. We will be in touch within one working day.
Rather talk it through first? Book a 30-minute introduction call