ENTERPRISE AI — TRAINING · DEPLOYMENT · OPERATIONS

Move AI into production, not into demonstrations.

Futura is the enterprise AI training, deployment, and operations network for complex organizations in China. We build internal AI champions through real work, use model-neutral forward-deployed engineering to move regulated workflows through value, data, and compliance gates into production, and operate them continuously for adoption, quality, cost, and risk.

  • Build capability
  • Own production
  • Compound scenario capital
4+2weeks
The procurement and responsibility boundary between capability and production
6hard gates
Non-compensatory — one failure stops the workflow
6stages
Discover through Compound, evidence at every step
  • Workflow redesign
  • Agent orchestration
  • Connectors & least privilege
  • Evals & golden sets
  • Failure-mode library
  • Human-in-the-loop
  • Private & isolated deployment
  • Model selection & migration
  • Adoption operations
  • Cost & latency governance
  • Audit & rollback

OUR CONVICTION

Enterprises do not lack AI ambition. They lack the capacity to reach production.

Choosing the right work, establishing a business baseline, securing data and system access, handling compliance and exceptions, earning employee adoption, and operating the system as models, workflows, and risks change — that is what is scarce.

Models will continue to multiply, improve, and get cheaper. We therefore do not treat any single model as a moat. We place evaluation, workflows, connectors, permissions, governance, and operations above the model layer: acceptance criteria first, model selection second.

We hold a second conviction. An enterprise does not want permanent vendor dependence; it wants capability of its own. By developing internal champions and shared standards of judgment first, we earn the right to take on the production problems an internal team cannot solve alone. Capability building is not marketing that precedes delivery. It is delivery.

What we are not

Being precise about position matters more than making it sound large.

  • Not a general education company measured by seat count, certificates, or satisfaction scores
  • Not a body shop billing engineer-days and resetting to zero at project end
  • Not an implementation reseller bound to one model, cloud, or vendor's interests
  • Not a data broker that pools, resells, or re-uses raw customer data across accounts
  • Not an outsourced sales agency taking over a client's entire commercial function
  • Not a foundation-model laboratory pursuing research disconnected from client production problems

WHAT WE DO

One value chain, three paid layers

These are not three unrelated products. They are the same production path entered at different depths. Most clients start with the capability program, because that is where joint discovery begins.

  1. CAPABILITY BUILDING

    Enterprise AI Enablement

    A four-week real-work program

    Client teams do not learn where the buttons are. They bring their own work: mapping the workflow, establishing KPI baselines, identifying rules and exceptions, becoming internal champions, building safe prototypes, and producing a deploy-or-stop decision package.

    Week 1
    Map the workflow, users, systems, and KPI baseline
    Week 2
    Decompose rules, exceptions, and human review; build a minimal prototype in a controlled environment
    Week 3
    Establish initial evals; validate data, permissions, value, risk, and adoption conditions
    Week 4
    Champions, use-case ranking, and a deploy / revise / stop decision package

    Completion is not a certificate and does not promise deployment. The program must let the client separate what an internal team can carry forward, what needs FDE, and what should stop.

  2. PRODUCTION DEPLOYMENT

    Forward-Deployed Engineering

    Fixed-scope production sprint

    Only workflows that pass all six hard gates enter FDE. The first two weeks of the statement of work validate production readiness: evals and golden set, data and permissions, interfaces, failure conditions, human escalation, rollback, and acceptance scope. Full engineering begins only after the Production Readiness Review passes.

    Engineering
    Agent orchestration, connectors, permission matrix, logging, monitoring
    Evaluation
    Golden sets covering normal, boundary, exception, refusal, and adversarial cases
    Release
    Offline → sandbox → shadow → canary, no skipped stages for high-risk steps
    Handover
    Runbooks, rollback drills, UAT and business acceptance records

    FDE is not responsible for producing an impressive demo. It is responsible for a system that runs reliably under real load and real constraints, and that a human can take over or roll back.

  3. CONTINUOUS OPERATIONS

    AI Operations

    Annual continuous operations

    Go-live is not the finish line. AI Operations continuously manages adoption, task quality, safety and compliance, model cost, drift, exceptions, incidents, and iteration — deciding together with the client's champions when to optimize, switch models, expand, or roll back.

    Value
    Adoption and business KPIs reviewed against a like-for-like baseline
    Quality
    Scheduled regression, production sampling, and human review
    Change
    Model, prompt, connector, and rule changes all enter change control
    Cost
    Governed by cost per successful task, not per-token list price

    A system that no longer creates value should be reduced, paused, or retired — not preserved to protect a renewal.

FUTURA PRODUCTION LOOP

Six stages, evidence at every one

The Futura Production Loop turns real enterprise work into governed production systems, and turns single engagements into reusable assets. Each stage must leave artifacts, name an owner, and meet its exit criteria before the next begins.

Select a stage

DISCOVER

Which workflows are actually worth rebuilding?

Turn "we want to use AI" into a bounded candidate pool with owners and baselines. Interviews cover the business, the people who actually do the work, IT and data, and risk — not only management.

Artifacts

  • Engagement Charter
  • Workflow Inventory
  • KPI Baseline
  • Data Inventory

Exit criteria

At least one candidate workflow has a named business owner, process owner, a traceable baseline, and confirmed data rights. Candidates without basic rights or value have been stopped.

TRAIN

Who inside the enterprise will own this capability?

A four-week real-work program builds internal champions and produces the evidence a workflow needs to enter the gate. Teaching serves the project decision; it never displaces validation on real work.

Artifacts

  • Champion Roster & Rubric
  • Prototype Evidence Log
  • Use-case Scorecard
  • Draft Gate Pack

Exit criteria

At least one champion can independently explain the workflow, its limits, common failures, and escalation. Prototypes run repeatably in an authorized environment and are explicitly labelled Prototype / Not Production.

GATE

Which workflows qualify for production?

Six hard gates drive a non-compensatory investment and risk decision. An existing relationship, a founder's rapport, or commercial urgency never substitutes for gate evidence.

Artifacts

  • Gate Pack
  • Gate Decision Record
  • FDE Sprint Charter / SOW

Exit criteria

H1–H6 all pass and are signed by the accountable parties. Responsibility and dates for production environments, data, and interfaces are confirmed. Open items have owners and deadlines.

DEPLOY

How does it run reliably under real data and real constraints?

Deliver the gated workflow as a production system with evaluation, permissions, monitoring, human takeover, and rollback. High-risk steps never skip a release stage.

Artifacts

  • Architecture Decision Record
  • Eval Plan & Golden Set
  • Connector Spec
  • Release & Rollback Plan
  • UAT & Acceptance Record

Exit criteria

Zero critical failure modes in release testing. The risk approver has signed the release. Rollback and human takeover have been rehearsed. The business owner has completed UAT and accepted known limitations in writing.

OPERATE

How is value, quality, safety, and cost sustained?

Keep the production system available, controlled, and measurable as the business, the models, and the organization change. "Available" and "actually used, and changing the process" are tracked as different things.

Artifacts

  • Operations Dashboard
  • Incident & Change Log
  • Value Review

Cycle completion

SLOs and exceptions reconciled for the cycle. Every change has approval and regression evidence. Value and adoption reviewed against baseline — model call volume is never reported as business value.

COMPOUND

How does the next delivery start from a higher floor?

Convert contractually reusable knowledge into internal assets with a rights provenance, tests, versions, and stated limits of applicability. "We wrote it down" is not compounding.

Artifacts

  • Asset Intake & Rights Check
  • Asset Release Note
  • Eval Pack / Connector / Failure Mode / Governance Template

Exit criteria

Contract rights, data boundaries, and licence checks all pass. No reasonable reader can reconstruct a client's identity, raw data, or trade secrets from the asset. The asset passes independent regression on synthetic or authorized data.

Stage duration is set by risk and the statement of work. The cadence above is a default reference, not a fixed schedule commitment.

SIX HARD GATES

Six hard gates, non-compensatory

If one fails, no score on the others compensates — the workflow does not enter production build. A gate has exactly three outcomes: Pass, Revise (time-boxed remediation in an isolated environment), or Stop.

  1. H1

    Business Value

    BUSINESS VALUE

    Which workflow is being rebuilt, and what measurable value does it create, for whom?

    Current baseline, target metric, applicable volume, value hypothesis and how it is calculated. "Efficiency" alone is not an answer.

    SIGN-OFFClient Business Owner

  2. H2

    Ownership & Budget

    OWNERSHIP & BUDGET

    Who owns the outcome, who accepts it, who pays, and who operates it after go-live?

    Executive sponsor, business owner, champion, budget or procurement path, acceptance authority and escalation route.

    SIGN-OFFClient Executive Sponsor

  3. H3

    Data Readiness

    DATA READINESS

    Is the data lawfully usable, of sufficient quality, and reliably obtainable under least privilege?

    Data inventory, rights provenance, classification, sample quality, retention and deletion requirements, data steward confirmation.

    SIGN-OFFClient Data / IT Owner

  4. H4

    Technical Feasibility

    TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY

    Can the systems be integrated, and are quality, latency, cost, and availability achievable?

    Target architecture, interface and connector feasibility, candidate model benchmarks, key dependencies, capacity and cost estimates.

    SIGN-OFFFutura FDE Lead + Client IT Owner

  5. H5

    Risk & Compliance

    RISK & COMPLIANCE

    Can security, privacy, IP, sector regulation, and the cost of errors be controlled?

    Risk classification, human-in-the-loop design, permissions and audit, subprocessor list, threat and misuse testing, rollback strategy.

    SIGN-OFFClient Risk Approver

  6. H6

    Operational Readiness

    OPERATIONAL READINESS

    After go-live, who monitors, handles exceptions, approves changes, and drives adoption?

    SLO / SLA boundaries, runbook plan, incident owner, adoption plan, AI Ops responsibility and ongoing budget.

    SIGN-OFFClient Process Owner + Futura Mission Lead

Legal rights, data authorization, and critical security requirements are never waived. Acceptable residual risk must be accepted in writing by an authorized client party and recorded in the Gate Decision Record.

ENGINEERING STANCE

Engineering stance

Two questions procurement always asks, and vendors usually answer vaguely: how you choose models, and where our data goes.

MODEL NEUTRALITY

Model neutrality is a mechanism, not a slogan

Neutrality does not mean never using a vendor's features, and it does not promise zero migration cost. It is the set of engineering practices that keep model choice driven by scenario evidence and keep critical workflows from being locked in by accident.

  1. Evals and failure criteria are defined from real tasks before a model is selected. Where two or more candidates qualify, at least two are compared.
  2. Candidates are compared on task performance, risk, latency, throughput, cost per successful task, deployment constraints, and contractual exit terms — not on general leaderboards.
  3. A single model adapter manages calls, authentication, logging, and versions. Prompts, tool schemas, business rules, and evals are versioned separately from model configuration.
  4. API, client VPC, on-premises, and isolated environments are all supported, and the client's existing cloud and model commitments are respected.
  5. Switching a model or vendor requires a full regression first — never because a new model ranks higher. Every choice and its lock-in risk is recorded in an Architecture Decision Record.

How it is verified

Comparable candidates, selection rationale, and an exit path exist in the ADR. The eval suite runs repeatably across candidates and produces like-for-like results. Critical workflows are periodically re-evaluated against alternative models and a manual fallback path.

DATA & IP BOUNDARY

Your data is not our flywheel

What we accumulate is scenario capital, not a customer-data flywheel. Raw data, personal information, business judgment, and trade secrets stay inside the governance boundary the client has approved.

Never leaves the client boundary

  • Raw or reversibly de-identified customer data
  • Credentials, permissions, internal URLs, system topology, security weaknesses
  • Non-public business rules, pricing, account lists, contracts
  • Prompts, logs, golden sets, and recordings containing client content
  • Model-training rights and public benchmark rights, absent separate written authorization

Becomes an asset only where the contract allows

  • De-identified workflow structures and interface patterns
  • Evaluation methods and synthetic or authorized rebuilt test sets
  • Failure-mode entries and regression cases
  • Connector patterns and governance templates
  • Anonymous benchmarks and second-delivery efficiency evidence

How it is enforced

All access uses named identities, least privilege, time limits, and audit. Development, test, and production environments are separated. Where data rights cannot be confirmed, we stop the line, pause processing, and escalate. At contract end, data is returned, deleted, or retained as agreed, with evidence of execution.

WHERE WE START

We start with regulated, rule-intensive operational work

This kind of work combines value, context, and testability: inputs and rules can be mapped, exceptions need domain judgment, errors carry explicit costs, and outputs must flow back into the systems of record.

Signals of a good fit

  • Real data and a business owner exist, but there is no complete AI product team
  • Process documentation and rules are dense, with human review, exception escalation, and cross-system read/write
  • Error rate, cycle time, throughput, labor cost, or revenue impact can be baselined
  • Explicit requirements around permissions, audit, data residency, compliance, and explainability
  • Once one workflow is proven, adjacent processes, departments, or subsidiaries can follow

Evidence-building domains

  • INSURANCE & TPA

    Claims and underwriting operations dense in rules and human review

  • ENERGY & INDUSTRY

    Contract, ledger, and rule-driven processes in industrial settings

  • CONTRACT & COMPLIANCE

    Clause review, obligation extraction, and approval chains

  • DOCUMENT OPERATIONS

    High-context processes that read, judge, and write back across systems

These are the domains where we build repeatable evidence. They are not a claim that Futura currently covers every enterprise AI use case.

Client names, workflow details, and quantitative results are disclosed only with that client's written authorization. Specific engagement references are available under NDA.

FUTURA AI RESEARCH LAB

The internal assetization engine

The Research Lab connects delivery to productization. It turns recurring production problems into the delivery operating system, evaluation packs, connectors, and named workflow packages. It is not an external foundation-model laboratory, and it is not a separate revenue line.

It measures itself on four auditable outcomes

  1. Whether the second delivery of a comparable workflow takes fewer hours
  2. Whether evals find defects more completely
  3. Whether connectors and governance templates reduce repeat customization
  4. Whether reuse improves quality and time to production

THE TEAM

Turning talent density into consistent delivery quality

Talent density is an input advantage, not the final moat. What is hard to copy is the documented system — selection, coaching, access tiers, QA, and review — proven through production outcomes.

  • Zhao Jiajie

    CEO — Capability Programs & Scenario Design

    Doctoral researcher, School of Architecture, Tsinghua University; M.S. Advanced Architectural Design, Columbia GSAPP; has taught at Columbia and Syracuse. The teaching background informs how complex knowledge becomes a trainable, feedback-driven organizational system; the systems-design background informs how people, processes, and constraints are abstracted.

  • Zhang Tingrui

    Technology & Agent Architecture

    Doctoral researcher, College of AI, Tsinghua University; robotics background from Zhejiang University. Leads model selection, agent orchestration, tool calling, and engineering architecture, and owns the implementation of the model-neutrality mechanism.

  • Qin Yihua

    Forward-Deployed Engineering

    Direct-entry doctoral candidate, College of AI, Tsinghua University; dual degree in mathematics and physics and in mechanical engineering. Takes prototypes to reliable, maintainable, reversible production deployments, and enforces evaluation and release discipline.

  • Lin Tongyu

    Product & Compliance

    Dual degree in AI and law, Tsinghua University; previously at Manus and ByteDance. Covers product requirements, client communication, and the compliance perspective, and contributes to data-rights and governance templates.

PRINCIPLES

Six principles

  1. Capability before dependence

    Build the client's judgment and operating capacity first; then take on what their team cannot do alone.

  2. Production, not demonstration

    Real data, permissions, exceptions, and organizational constraints define completion.

  3. Evaluation before model

    Define success, failure, and risk boundaries before choosing a model or an architecture.

  4. Every engagement leaves a compliant asset

    Reuse must stay inside contractual, data, IP, and confidentiality boundaries.

  5. Where value can be measured, accept measurement

    Baselines, adoption, quality, cost, safety, and expansion — not activity — are the evidence.

  6. Talent must be amplified by a system

    Standard method, access tiers, QA, review, and certification are what turn density into scale.

GET IN TOUCH

Start with a thirty-minute conversation about one workflow

Tell us about the specific workflow you are considering. A first call usually runs thirty minutes and ends with a clear answer on whether there is a basis to work together — including a recommendation not to start, when the conditions are not there.