Conversational AI for customer research
- 12 weeks
- from concept to launch
AI Development Company
An AI prototype or POC proves the idea works. It does not prove it survives real data, real volume, and real cost. We assess what you've built, keep what's validated, then engineer the production system around it: real data pipelines, evaluation, guardrails, and cost control, so the version your customers meet is the one that holds up.
Generative AI, RAG, AI agents, ML, NLP, computer vision, and voice AI, shipped to production
Model-agnostic: GPT, Claude, Gemini, Llama, and open-source, chosen for your task
Evaluation and monitoring built in, so it does not say something wrong in front of your customer
You own all the code, weights, and IP, and pay the model bills directly, at cost
Recent work
Conversational AI · Customer research
48 hours to usable insights
Built a conversational AI system that runs customer interviews at scale and returns usable insight within days, not weeks.
AI OCR · Gas station operations
20,000+ daily transactions processed
Deployed an AI OCR pipeline that reads fuel transaction records in real time, ending manual data entry errors.
Remote patient monitoring · US healthcare
20% less time on clinical decisions
Shipped a HIPAA-compliant AI RPM app in 12 weeks that cut the time clinicians spend on routine clinical decisions.
The problem
Built an AI demo that impressed the board but falls over on real data and real volume?
POC works on happy-path data and nowhere else, and you can't tell if it's the model or the plumbing?
Watched an AI feature's monthly bill double before anyone noticed the token spend?
Short answer
RaftLabs is an AI development company that builds production AI systems, not demos: generative AI, RAG, AI agents, machine learning, NLP, computer vision, and voice AI. It assesses an existing AI prototype or proof of concept, keeps what is validated, and engineers the production system around it: real data pipelines, evaluation, guardrails, and cost control, so quality holds up with real users. It is model-agnostic across GPT, Claude, Gemini, and Llama. RaftLabs has shipped 20+ AI products and 100+ products since 2015, prices are fixed before development starts, and clients own all the code and IP. AI development starts at $9,500 for a proof of concept and scales to larger production builds.
Key takeaways
Trusted by


Picture the version you actually want. The AI feature is live, and your customers trust it with real work, unsupervised. It holds up on the messy inputs nobody scripted. The bill is flat and predictable. And when an investor asks what stops a bigger company from copying you next quarter, you have a real answer, because the system is built on your data and your workflow, not a prompt anyone could retype.
Now the version most teams get instead. The prototype answered every question in the pitch meeting. Then it met real data at real volume: the edge cases nobody scripted, the latency nobody measured, the cost nobody modeled. The demo was theater. The production system is the product, and the gap between them is wider in AI than in any other kind of software.
We build for the second act.
AI development services turn an AI idea into a system real customers can use: picking the right approach for the problem, building the model layer plus the retrieval, evaluation, and monitoring around it, and integrating the result into your product. The model is a small part; the engineering that makes it hold up is the rest.
At RaftLabs that scope runs from generative AI and RAG to AI agents, machine learning, NLP and computer vision, and voice AI. Every build is model-agnostic, fixed-price before we start, and yours to own outright, with the code, weights, and IP deployed in your accounts. We've shipped this for healthcare, fintech, logistics, and retail, and stayed on past launch to keep it working.
The numbers are not kind, and they are not really about the models.
The odds today
When an AI system is wrong in production, it is rarely quiet about it. Air Canada's support chatbot invented a bereavement refund policy that did not exist, and a tribunal ruled the airline had to honor it. Builder.ai raised more than $450 million to build apps "with AI," and when it collapsed in 2025, reporting found much of the "AI" had been human engineers all along. The pattern underneath both is the same one MIT and RAND keep finding: the demo ran on curated inputs, and then real users showed up.
Almost none of that is a model problem. What breaks is the distance between a system that impresses a room and one that survives real data, real volume, and real cost. MIT found the more useful half of that story too: vendor-built AI systems reach production about twice as often as internal builds. Which approach you take, and who you take it with, is most of the outcome.
If you're reading this, you've likely taken a run at one of these. None of them are foolish. Each one stalls in a predictable place.
The thread through all four: the model was never the hard part. The engineering discipline around it is, and that's the part each of these skips.
RAND interviewed data scientists across the industry to learn why AI fails more than twice as often as other software, and the causes are rarely the model. They cluster into a handful of avoidable gaps: no one agreed the problem before the building started, the data was never audited, the team reached for the flashiest model instead of the simplest one that clears the bar, and the unglamorous scaffolding (retrieval, evaluation, monitoring, cost control) got skipped until launch week. We make each of those calls early, on purpose. That is the whole difference between a pilot and a system your customers keep using.
RaftLabs has shipped 20+ AI products to production, from conversational agents to computer-vision pipelines. That work sits inside a longer record: 100+ products since 2015, rated 4.9/5 on Clutch. The engineers who assess your problem are the ones who build it. No bait-and-switch, no offshore handoff after the contract is signed. Compliance (GDPR, HIPAA, SOC 2) is scoped in week 1, and we lock a fixed price before development starts.
How it works
We map the use case, your data, and your constraints, then recommend the approach (RAG, AI agents, fine-tuning, or custom ML) and lock a fixed price before any build starts.
A focused proof of concept answers one question against a defined success criterion: does this work on your data, at acceptable quality and cost? If it fails, you've spent a fraction of a failed production build.
Model layer, retrieval, orchestration, and the application around them, with evaluation and failure handling built in from the first sprint rather than bolted on before launch.
We ship to production with quality monitoring, cost controls, and documentation any competent team can maintain, then stay on to extend it. No lock-in, no handoff cliff.
Capabilities
The difference between a demo and a production system isn't visible in a pitch deck. It's visible six weeks after launch, when the inputs get messy and the volume climbs. Here's what we build in that gap.
Demo vs production
Take the one piece most demos skip: evaluation. Before a new prompt or model goes live, we run it against a golden set of your real questions and score every answer. A wrong or low-quality response gets caught in that scoring, not by the customer on the other end of it. That is the machinery that turns "it worked in the demo" into "it holds up in production."
Proof
Clients include Vodafone, T-Mobile, Aldi, Nike, Cisco, and Lockheed Martin, across AI, SaaS, mobile, automation, and enterprise platforms.
What clients say
Three-year average engagement. Founders and operators describing the work in their own words. No marketing varnish.

I found RaftLabs to be the perfect partner for Perceptional, with their expertise in helping startup founders build MVPs, a free consultation, a prototype that matched my vision, and their unwavering support.
The AI services market has earned its skeptics. Before you get on a call, here are the objections we hear most, answered plainly.
According to Gartner, at least 30% of generative AI projects are abandoned after the proof-of-concept stage, most often over unclear business value or escalating cost. We price to prevent exactly that. We price by project, not by the hour, and after a scoping session you get a fixed-cost proposal with a defined scope, timeline, and price, so you know the number before development starts.
| Project type | Typical timeline | Cost range |
|---|---|---|
| Proof of concept, one focused technical question | 2-4 weeks | $9,500-$20,000 |
| AI feature integrated into an existing product | 4-8 weeks | $25,000-$60,000 |
| Standalone AI application with RAG, evaluation, and monitoring | 8-14 weeks | $55,000-$150,000 |
| Complex multi-agent system or custom ML pipeline | 3-6 months | $100,000-$350,000 |
What pushes cost up: high accuracy thresholds that need fine-tuning or custom ML, strict compliance such as HIPAA, SOC 2, and GDPR, and real-time latency requirements. What keeps it down: a narrow first scope, a well-labeled dataset, and starting with a proof of concept before committing to a full build. We scope every project before pricing it.
What it costs
A proof of concept validates the approach first; the production build is scoped, costed, and locked before development starts.
A proof of concept starts at $9,500; production builds start at $25,000 once the concept is validated. Most clients start with the PoC and scope production from there.
You get a firm proposal after a scoping session, not an hourly estimate that shifts as work progresses. Start with the proof of concept, then scope the production build once you've seen results on your own data.
Prove it first
A focused 2-4 week proof of concept with a defined success criterion. If it succeeds, we scope the production build. If it doesn't, you've spent a fraction of what a failed production build would cost, and you keep the findings.
No hourly billing
Once we scope the work, that price is locked in writing, no surprise invoices, no change fees you didn't agree to.
You own it all
The code, model weights, prompts, and evaluation datasets are yours, deployed in your accounts. You pay the model bills directly, at cost, with no markup. No proprietary framework to license, no lock-in, no retainer you can't walk away from.
The unglamorous parts that decide whether an AI system holds up with real users, not just in the demo.
Every answer scored against a golden dataset, so quality is a number you can watch, not a gut feel. Regression tests catch a drop when a prompt or model changes, before your users do.
Output quality tracked in production with drift alerts, so the first to notice a problem is your team, not a customer leaving a one-star review.
Model choice, caching, and batching that keep spend flat when users love the product, plus a run-rate estimate at your volume before you commit. The bill that "doubled before anyone noticed" is an engineering choice; we make it the other way.
For customer-facing systems, fallbacks and human-review queues, so the model escalates or declines on a shaky answer instead of confidently saying something wrong in front of the person paying you.
Deployed in your accounts, with architecture, prompts, and eval sets documented, so any competent engineer can run and extend it. Ownership without a hostage situation.
We stay on to monitor, tune, and grow the system after launch. No offshore handoff, no ghosting the week after go-live.
The model rarely changes across sectors. What changes is the data you have, the accuracy threshold that makes a use case worth building, and the compliance you deploy under. We've shipped production AI for healthcare, HIPAA-compliant remote patient monitoring and clinical documentation, for financial services and fintech, document extraction, fraud detection, and AML anomaly detection, and for logistics, demand forecasting and freight-document extraction into TMS and ERP systems.
The same patterns carry into insurance, claims triage and underwriting risk scoring with audit trails a regulator can read, into retail and e-commerce, recommendation engines and demand forecasting once the transaction data clears the threshold, and into manufacturing, predictive maintenance and computer-vision quality control from clean sensor data. We quantify the data threshold before recommending a custom build, so you know a use case is viable before the budget is on the line.
Stay on topic

Article
Why 85% of AI projects fail (and how to beat the odds)
85% of AI projects fail - not from bad algorithms, but from five predictable implementation mistakes that every organization makes. Here is how to be in the 15% that succeeds.
Read more
Article
10 Questions to Ask Before Hiring an AI Development Company
You have three quotes, three impressive demos, and three companies claiming they can build exactly what you need. Here are the 10 questions that cut through the pitch and reveal which company actually delivers.
Read more
Article
AI voice agents: When to build and when to skip
Voice AI demos sound impressive. Production voice agents handling 10,000 daily calls with sub-500ms latency are a completely different engineering challenge. Here is the technical reality.
Read moreYou run a proof of concept first. It's a time-boxed 2-4 week build with one job: answer whether this works on your data, at acceptable quality, at feasible cost, against a success criterion we agree up front. It costs $9,500 to $20,000. If it clears the bar, we scope the production build. If it doesn't, you've learned the answer for a fraction of what a failed production build would have cost, and you walk away with the findings. Feasibility doubt is a reason to start with a POC, not a reason to wait.
The right approach depends on what the system needs to do, what data you have, and what you're constrained by. RAG (retrieval-augmented generation): when you need answers grounded in your existing documents, knowledge base, or data, without training a model. AI agents: when you need to automate a multi-step workflow where the AI uses tools, makes decisions, and adapts to what it finds. Fine-tuning: when you have a narrow task, a labeled dataset, and a general model isn't accurate enough. Custom ML: when you have a prediction or classification problem and labeled historical data. We work out the right approach in a scoping session before recommending a build, and we'll tell you when the honest answer is plain code or an off-the-shelf tool instead.
Fair question, and one worth asking every vendor. A wrapper is a prompt with a nice interface. Production AI is the part underneath: retrieval that grounds answers in your data, an evaluation harness that scores output against a golden dataset, monitoring that catches quality drift before your users do, and cost controls that keep the model bill predictable. Ask us for architecture diagrams, evaluation results, and the retros from AI systems we've shipped and still support. You also pay the model bills directly, on your own accounts, so a hidden markup on someone else's API isn't even possible here. If a vendor can only show you a demo, that's the tell.
No. We use OpenAI (GPT-4o, GPT-4o mini), Anthropic (Claude), Google (Gemini), Meta (Llama), and open-source models, depending on what's right for the use case. Model selection is driven by performance on your task, cost at your volume, data-residency requirements, and latency. We have production experience across the major frontier models and will tell you the trade-offs honestly, including when a cheaper or open-source model is the better fit than the most capable frontier one.
This is the risk that ends up in the news, so we design against it from the start. One airline's chatbot invented a refund policy that didn't exist and a tribunal made the company honor it. That failure came from shipping a model with no guardrails, not from the model itself. Quality in production comes from evaluation infrastructure: evaluation datasets that represent your real query distribution, automated scoring with LLM-as-judge for qualitative output, regression testing to catch drops when a prompt or model changes, and production monitoring over time. For customer-facing systems we add guardrails and fallbacks, so the model refuses or escalates to a human instead of inventing an answer.
Costs range by scope. An AI proof of concept runs $9,500 to $20,000 for a 2-4 week investigation. A production AI feature inside an existing product runs $25,000 to $60,000. A standalone AI application with RAG, evaluation, and monitoring runs $55,000 to $150,000. A complex multi-agent system or custom ML pipeline runs $100,000 to $350,000. You get a fixed-cost proposal after a scoping session, not an hourly estimate that drifts as scope changes.
You do, all of it: the source code, any fine-tuned model weights, the prompts, the evaluation datasets, and the infrastructure configuration. Everything is deployed in your accounts and documented so your team can run and change it without us. There's no proprietary framework to license and no lock-in that forces a retainer. If you take the whole system in-house after launch, everything you need is already yours.
You pay the model and infrastructure bills directly, on your own accounts, so there's no markup and full visibility into what the system costs to run. What that bill looks like is a design decision we make with you: model choice (a smaller or open-source model wherever it performs well enough), caching and retrieval to cut redundant calls, and batching to control throughput cost. Token bills are famous for doubling unnoticed; we estimate the run-rate at your expected volume during scoping, so the monthly number is on the table before you commit, not a surprise after launch.
Check the portfolio first. A company that has shipped AI in your industry already knows the edge cases and compliance you'll hit. A company that has only shipped demos will discover them at your expense. Then look at the process: do they show you a working prototype before you commit to a full build, do they lock the price before development starts, do they stay available after launch? Finally, ask who builds the work. The team that pitches should be the team that builds. Bait-and-switch, where senior engineers close the deal and junior contractors do the work, is common enough that you should ask directly.
An AI proof of concept is a time-boxed build that answers a specific technical question: does this approach work on our data, at acceptable quality, at feasible cost? It makes sense when the task is novel enough that there's genuine uncertainty, when data quality or availability is unknown, or when compliance, latency, or cost need validating before a full build. We run focused 2-4 week POCs with a defined success criterion. If it succeeds, we scope the production build. If it doesn't, you've spent a fraction of what a failed production build would cost.
Data security is scoped in week 1, not retrofitted before launch. We've shipped HIPAA-compliant AI for US healthcare, SOC 2-aligned systems for financial services, and GDPR-aligned products for European markets. Standard on every project: data processing agreements before development starts, access controls and audit trails designed into the architecture from the start, and clear documentation of where data flows, including which third-party models see what data. We sign NDAs before any technical conversation begins.
It varies with complexity. Simple AI apps typically take 1 to 2 months (6 to 8 weeks); full-featured products run 3 to 4 months (12 to 14 weeks). Adding AI to an existing product usually runs 4 to 8 weeks, depending on the codebase and the capability. We agree the timeline against your expectations before development starts, so the date isn't a moving target.
Most of the AI work we do is integration into an existing product, not a greenfield build. Common patterns: adding document processing to a workflow tool, embedding a support assistant into a customer-facing product, or adding an AI layer to existing data pipelines for analytics or anomaly detection. The starting point is the same as a new build: a discovery session where we map your architecture, find the integration points, and scope the work before any development starts.
If AI is core to your product and you can hire and keep a senior ML and platform team, in-house is the right long-term answer. The gap is time. Hiring that team and building the evaluation, retrieval, and monitoring scaffolding around a model usually takes the better part of a year before the first production system ships. We bring that scaffolding and the production experience with us, ship the first system in weeks, and hand it over documented so your team can own it. Many clients use us to ship v1 and prove the value, then build the in-house team around a system that already works.
Work with us
We scope AI Development Company in 30 minutes. You walk away with a clear cost, timeline, and approach. No commitment required.