AI Sovereignty Audit
The entry point2 weeks · €9,500 (fixed price, plus VAT)
Before you invest in an AI system, you should know whether it will pay off. That is exactly what the audit clarifies. In two weeks we examine three things: your processes (where knowledge is created, where it is lost), your data (what exists, what is usable, what must never leave the house) and your organisation's absorption capacity — the honest question of how much change it can take on today. Added to this is the sovereignty check: what sits with third parties today, what should sit with you, and what would be transferable if it came to that?
Outcome: A written report with a prioritised roadmap — what is worth doing, what is not, and in which order. “It is not worth it for you at the moment” is a possible result too. The report is written so that it remains usable if you continue with someone else afterwards. That is intentional.
Enquire about an audit→Memory/Architecture Sprint
The pilot4–6 weeks · €24,000–42,000 (plus VAT, depending on scope)
A sprint proves on a real process what a memory system can do in your company — not on a demo. Together we pick a process with real knowledge loss: quoting, service, procurement, or the experience of a department whose key people are about to leave. On top of it we set up a pilot with ZenBrain and ZenAI: on your infrastructure, with your data, in your ownership.
The technical foundation is published and openly verifiable: 15 memory mechanisms (9 foundational, 6 PMA), an open package with 20 modules — independently judged, in our benchmarks: LongMemEval 47.7% vs. 31–43%.
Outcome: A running pilot plus a joint evaluation with measurements — not our assessment, but your numbers: what did the system retain, what did it find, what did it save the specialist department? Then you decide: keep operating it yourself, expand it, or end it. All three paths are open; documentation and handover are part of the sprint.
Discuss a sprint→Sovereign AI Advisory
The companionRetainer · €3,000–6,000/month (plus VAT) · maximum of 4 mandates
For executive teams that develop their AI strategy over months with scientific support: ongoing advice on architecture decisions, data sovereignty and make-or-buy. We assess the offers that land on your desk vendor-neutrally — we sell nothing you would have to subscribe to afterwards — and, on request, help prepare conversations with the works council, IT and shareholders.
We run a maximum of four advisory mandates in parallel — not as a scarcity gesture, but because a research lab with one researcher cannot seriously support more. When all slots are taken, it says so here.
Outcome: A second, independent voice in the room when decisions are due. Cancellable at the end of any month.
Ask about availability→Frequently asked questions
We have a works council. What does that mean for a project?
That we involve it early — which we recommend anyway. Our systems analyse processes and documents, not employees; monitoring the performance or behaviour of individuals is not part of our work. For committee discussions we supply comprehensible material.
Do our data have to leave the house?
No. Operation on your own infrastructure, or in a European environment under your control, is the normal case, not the exception. What may sit where is explicitly part of the audit.
Who will actually work on our project?
Alexander Bering, personally. There is no junior team to delegate to — which is why capacity is limited, and why the offers are cut so that this depth remains affordable.
And what if it turns out that it is not (yet) worth it for us?
Then that is exactly what the report will say, with reasons and with the conditions under which it would become worthwhile. A research lab has no revenue target that would require a different result.