From pilot to fleet
Three short, fixed-price reviews for the step nobody funds. Each one answers a single question, agreed in writing on day one, in five days over two to three weeks. The report is yours to keep and act on, with or without us.
One review for each seat at the table
The same handful of questions decides whether a technology scales beyond its first site. Each review asks them early - from your side of the table.
Pilot-to-fleet review
- What we look at
- The pilot record, up to four conversations with the people who'd have to make it work and a structured look at the robotics, the AI and the OT integration.
- What you get
- A short report your leadership can act on - the barriers, who should own each and the route to site two - and a one-hour walk-through.
- Then, if useful
- A plan for site two; the competence route; programme advice.
Operator-readiness review
- What we look at
- Your trial record and documentation, up to four conversations and a structured look from the operator's side of the table - the assurance case, the OT and cyber-security integration and competence.
- What you get
- An operator-readiness gap list, a short report on what to fix first and a one-hour walk-through.
- Then, if useful
- The evidence pack; support in the first fleet conversation; board or advisory support.
Technical due diligence review
- What we look at
- The technical material from the data room, up to four conversations including management and a structured look at the robotics, the AI and the OT it has to plug into. Faster if your committee date needs it.
- What you get
- A short report written for your investment committee, questions to put to management and a one-hour walk-through.
- Then, if useful
- A review of the next deal; a closer look at one barrier; board support.
Why good pilots stall at the first site
The answer usually turns on one or two of these. They are examples, not the review: which of them matter in your case - and what else does - is what the five days are for.
The middle isn't funded
The vendor's contract ends at the trial - and the site's change process was built for proven equipment. Someone carries the step between them, without the budget or the mandate.
The OT work hasn't been scoped
The robot works. Joining it to the site's control systems (OT) and cyber-security rules (IEC 62443) is a project in its own right, often the longest one.
The evidence is the wrong kind
A certificate shows it's fit for purpose. Only time on a live site shows it's fit for service - and that's what an operator signs against.
Competence is assumed
Who is trained to run it, check it and stop it, at the second site - not just the first?
Three lenses, one test
The three elements, asked as plain questions. Underneath each sits a structured set of checks, built up deployment by deployment - which is what makes this five days rather than five weeks. The report shows what we found and why it matters; the checks stay with Dewhurst.tech.
Have we seen everything it touches?
The plant, the people, the procedures, the history - the things a demonstration never meets.
Does the right signal reach the person who decides?
From the sensor, through the OT and control systems, to the work order and the person who acts on it.
Can it be brought in step by step?
So a failure along the way is survivable - and the gain outlasts the person who championed it.
One test across all three: when something goes wrong - and something always does - does the plan survive it? Engineers call it safe-life ("it won't fail") or fail-safe ("when it fails, we're still in the game").
Five days of review, over two to three weeks
Remote by design, which is what keeps it quick. A site day can be added at cost if you'd like one, agreed in advance.
About ten pages, with the answer on page one
Written for your leadership team, in plain English, with an owner suggested for each barrier - so it can turn straight into a decision.
- The answerOne paragraph, in plain English. Yes, no, or yes-if.
- What would stop it scalingThe three or four barriers that matter - each rated for how serious it is.
- What removes eachThe action, and who should own it.
- The part written for your seatAsset OwnersThe route to site two: what has to be true, in what order, for the second site to say yes.Technology ProvidersWhat each operator gate will ask, against what you can show today - and what to fix first.InvestorsQuestions to put to management - the ones that test the barriers.
- The recommended next stepWith or without us.
Fixed scope, fixed fee, no surprises
Built to stand on its own
You can act on the report without us. If you'd like help acting on it, the natural next pieces are our four services.
A plan for site two - the deployment and assurance plan that takes the pilot, and the OT it joins, to its second site.
The people side - the competence and qualification route for those who'll run, check and stop it - the robots and the OT systems alike.
Board-level advice on the wider robotics, AI and OT programme - or board support for an investor.
Due diligence on the robotics and OT in the next deal, or a closer look at one barrier where the report finds something serious.
Before the commitment is made.
The first step is a 30-minute call to agree the one question worth answering first.
Want to frame the value case first? The Value & ROI Calculator sets the whole-system costs side by side.