Safety · Security · Resilience

AI workflows for consequential operational work.

Deploy controlled workflows for investigations, document assessment, triage and operational intelligence - without having to build and validate them yourself.

Tested on real operational records. Measured improvements. Human verification retained.

Discuss a workflow ↗ See what the workflows do ↓
Applications

Five operational workflows. Five tangible outputs.

Start with the work that needs improving, not the technology.

Workflow
What SIRV does
What the team receives
Procedure access
Retrieves relevant guidance from approved sources.
Source-linked answer Operational decision remains with the user
Document evaluation
Checks documents against defined standards and expectations.
Exceptions with evidence Competent reviewer accepts or rejects findings
Triage
Assesses and routes incoming reports and alerts under defined rules.
Prioritised review queue Uncertain or consequential cases escalated
Operational picture
Connects reports, logs and other relevant sources.
Traceable timeline and emerging patterns Investigator tests interpretation
Actions & learning
Links findings to owners, actions, outcomes and prior records.
Reviewable action history Named owners retain accountability
Operating model

Controls belong inside the workflow.

A practical example: assessing a risk assessment and method statement (RAMS).

Documents receivedRAMS, supporting plans and permitsSubmitted for assessment
Requirements checkedScope, site requirements and approved criteriaDefined assessment basis
Exceptions identifiedMissing information, inconsistencies and supporting extractsEvidence for review
Competent person reviewsChecks the evidence; accepts, challenges or returns findingsHuman decision
Decision recordedOutcome, responsible person and required follow-upAudit trail

The assessment supports the reviewer; responsibility for acceptance and follow-up remains with the designated person.

Build versus buy

Where the engineering responsibility sits.

Build internally with general AI tools
Design the workflow Define sources, rules, decisions and boundaries
Prove the workflow Build evaluation, exception tests and assurance
Maintain the workflow Monitor reliability and respond to change
Deploy with SIRV AI
Configure an established pattern Adapt the workflow to your approved sources and policy
Test on your real tasks Review evidence, exceptions and performance together
Agree ongoing responsibilities Operational ownership and support are explicitly defined

SIRV AI · CUSTOMER SPRINT EVIDENCE

Two workflows tested on operational records.

Different operational tasks, different forms of evidence. Results are presented with their limits and the role of human review.

Investigation · Anonymised customer sprint

Unauthorised-access investigation

Access-control events were reconciled to surface cases for investigation. CCTV examination and final verification remained with a human reviewer.

+20%More valid cases identifiedFour additional cases compared with the original manual process.
6h → 20mEstimated processing effortApproximately 94% lower, including human review.
30d → 20mEstimated elapsed timeHistorical duration compared with a proposed completed workflow.

Case-identification findings were demonstrated in the sprint. Time comparisons are estimates, not independently verified production benchmarks. The 20-minute estimate includes human CCTV review and final verification.

Reporting and assurance · Anonymised customer sprint

Operational reporting and management assurance

SIRV AI demonstrated activity reporting and the assessment of record completeness against specified, provisional criteria. The significant capability is showing managers which records lack sufficient evidence, so they can review the deficiency and give targeted feedback.

CUSTOMER-REPORTED MANUAL BASELINE
3+ hours

To prepare an example management report, followed by additional analysis time. This is not a measured AI time saving.

WHAT THE DEMONSTRATION SHOWED
Activity reportingOperator activity and performance by category
Trends and exceptionsWeekly patterns and departures requiring attention
Proactive assuranceVisibility of assurance activity undertaken
Record-quality reviewMissing evidence and explained deficiencies against provisional criteria
Customer confirmation

The customer confirmed that the demonstration met the original requirements.

The reporting-quality criteria were provisional. Any final criteria, management feedback process and operational deployment require agreement. Time savings and improvements in reporting quality have not yet been independently measured.

Explore published customer evidence ↗
Established operational results

Evidence from established deployments.

These outcomes are from established SIRV operational deployments. They are not all SIRV AI outcomes.

DLR

Activity records and proof of presence

500,000 sheetsof paper removed from reporting workflows
Read case study ↗

Explore all case studies ↗

Existing operational data

Turn the records you already collect into usable operational intelligence.

Existing records

Incident reports · daily occurrence book · access logs · operational procedures · location information

→
Controlled operational outputs

Priorities · assessments · timelines · verified decisions · actions · learning

Start with a bounded workflow

Choose one important operational task. Test it. Measure the outcome.

Agree the sources, expected outputs, review points and measures of success before deployment.

Discuss a workflow ↗
DLR Customer logo
Elizabeth Line Logo customer SIRV

SIRV AI

SIRV AI

Discuss a workflow

Run a trial

Existing products

Internal reports

Daily Occurrence Book

Incident reporting

Maps & visualisations

Evidence & trust

Case studies

Security and privacy

How we measure impact

Awards & recognition

Company

About SIRV

Insights

Contact

css.php