Home·Why Ajutant

The two questions we get asked most.

If you're a regulated mid-market IT leader looking at AI options, there are realistically two alternatives to Ajutant: Microsoft Copilot, or building it yourself. Here is what we think about both, said plainly.

Question one

"We have Copilot already. What's different here?"

Copilot is a productivity overlay, not a deployment platform for your specific AI use cases. It gives every user a fast answer; it doesn't give your organisation a way to build, govern, and operate the AI capabilities your business actually needs.

Question two

"We could build this ourselves. Why pay you?"

You probably could. But by the time you've built the build experience, the governance, the audit trail, the model gateway, and the operational tooling, and committed to maintaining it forever, you'll have spent considerably more than the platform costs.

Copilot is a productivity tool. Ajutant is a deployment platform.

Microsoft Copilot is a good productivity tool. Every desk worker in a Microsoft 365 estate benefits from a model integrated into their daily flow. What it isn't, and isn't designed to be, is a way to put your organisation's specific AI use cases into production safely.

When a regulated mid-market IT team tries to use Copilot for that job, they hit a recurring set of problems: agents that inherit user credentials and bypass data restrictions, agent-to-agent calls with no governed audit, no way to build assistants grounded in your own document base with the controls your security team needs, no way to swap models, and no real way to operate the thing as one governed AI capability across the organisation.

What that looks like inside the organisation is what we saw repeatedly before we started building Ajutant: the people who went around governance shipped. The team that respected it looked incapable. Not because the responsible team couldn't do the work, but because the right way had no platform to run on.

That's not Copilot failing at what it's built for. It's people trying to use Copilot for what it isn't built for.

What you're buying
Microsoft CopilotA productivity assistant for every Microsoft 365 user
AjutantA platform for building, governing, and operating your specific AI use cases
Who builds new assistants
Microsoft CopilotMicrosoft, via product roadmap. Some authoring via Copilot Studio at extra cost.
AjutantYour build team, with proper authoring, test bed, draft/publish, version history
Where your data lives during use
Microsoft CopilotIn Microsoft's broader Copilot service infrastructure, governed by their boundaries
AjutantIn your Azure tenant. No shared backend. No Ajutant-hosted control plane.
Model choice
Microsoft CopilotMicrosoft's choice, on Microsoft's timing
AjutantYour choice, per assistant, swappable any time
Audit and tracing
Microsoft CopilotCompliance-tier logging for compliance-tier customers
AjutantFull request-level tracing into Azure Log Analytics in your tenant
Governance scope
Microsoft CopilotUser-level controls (who has Copilot, broadly what they can do)
AjutantPer-assistant governance, AUP enforcement at point of use, kill switch per assistant or platform-wide
Feedback on responses
Microsoft CopilotReturns to Microsoft for product improvement
AjutantStays in your tenant. Improvement signal to the assistant owner; serious issues to IT Ops in real time.
When agents call other systems
Microsoft CopilotCredential inheritance and agent-to-agent calls bypass governance in known patterns
AjutantAll routes go through one governed gateway
Annual cost per seat
Microsoft Copilot~£24/seat (Copilot for M365), plus the cost of getting it to actually deliver value
Ajutant£28/seat (50-seat minimum) with no professional services bill to make it work

What Copilot is genuinely good at

Copilot makes individual Microsoft 365 users more productive in their daily work. Summarising long Teams threads, drafting in Word, working in Excel: real benefits, delivered to every seat, with very little IT effort. If that is what you bought Copilot for, you have probably had a good experience.

The problem is that "make our people more productive" and "put our organisation's AI use cases into production safely" are different jobs. Copilot does the first one.

Ajutant is built to make Microsoft's AI investment actually pay off for regulated organisations. Same Azure environment, same enterprise contracts, same identity provider. We aren't asking you to leave the Microsoft stack. We're asking you to put a governed deployment platform on top of it.

For the people doing their day-to-day work, keep Copilot. For everything that needs governance, build it on Ajutant.

You could build this. The question is whether you should.

Most IT teams in regulated mid-market organisations are capable of building this. The components are real and available. With a competent engineering team and a clear runway, twelve to eighteen months gets you a working version.

The question isn't whether you can. It's whether the eighteen months, the engineering capacity, and the long-term maintenance cost of doing so is the best use of either. Here is the honest reckoning.

Time to first use case in production
Build it yourself9 to 18 months, before the first business outcome
AjutantWeeks to first use case; months to a working portfolio
Engineering capacity needed
Build it yourselfA multi-discipline team: AI engineers, security, infra, frontend, ops. Hired, retained, paid.
AjutantA small build team using existing IT skills, no specialist AI engineers required
Build experience
Build it yourselfYou design and build the authoring environment, test bed, version control, draft/publish workflow from scratch
AjutantBuilt in, tested, hardened by use
Governance layer
Build it yourselfYou design and build AUP enforcement, PII guardrails, audit trails, kill switch, cost controls
AjutantBuilt in, designed for regulated organisations
Model gateway
Build it yourselfYou design and build the abstraction, model swapping, governed routing for third-party tools
AjutantBuilt in, OpenAI-compatible endpoint plus full REST APIs
Feedback routing
Build it yourselfNot usually scoped on day one. Often added later, often badly.
AjutantTwo-stream routing: improvement to assistant owner, serious issues to IT Ops in real time
Ongoing maintenance burden
Build it yourselfYours, forever. Every model change, every security patch, every regulatory shift.
AjutantOurs. Updates pushed to your deployment without changing what you've built on top.
Total cost of ownership (3 years)
Build it yourselfConservatively £1m+ in build, plus annual maintenance and team retention
AjutantPlatform fee at £28/seat with no professional services bill

When build-your-own is the right answer

It is the right answer when AI delivery is a strategic capability you want to own rather than buy. Some organisations have made that choice deliberately and well, usually because their use cases are so unusual, or their scale is so large, that a packaged platform can't fit. For most regulated mid-market organisations, those conditions don't apply.

If you're building because you've been told build-vs-buy was the default analysis, ask a sharper question: what's the actual strategic value of owning the AI delivery platform itself, versus owning the use cases that run on it?

Ajutant exists because building it yourself isn't a good use of most IT teams' time, but the use cases you'd build it for are still worth running. The platform compresses the eighteen-month build into a deployment, and frees your engineering capacity to work on the things that are actually unique to your organisation.

The question we'd encourage you to ask: in twelve months' time, would you rather have built a platform, or shipped twelve use cases that run on one?

Comparing options seriously? Bring your alternatives.

We'll talk through your specific situation, your current Copilot estate or your build plan, and where Ajutant fits or doesn't. If we aren't the right answer for you, we'll say so.

Book a 30-minute discovery call →