We design, validate, and operationalise enterprise reliability and disaster recovery programmes — engineering measurable SLOs, proven failover capability, and organisational readiness for the moments that matter most.
Platform failures are not technology failures — they are architecture and process failures. Systems that lack defined reliability targets, observable failure signals, and structured incident response will degrade under scale. Resilience is not a single tool or backup job either; it is an engineered capability, aligning recovery design with real business impact so recovery strategies are executable plans, not theoretical documents.
Defining what good looks like, how it's measured, and what happens when the error budget runs out.
Built into the platform, not bolted on — so failure signals are clear, correlated, and actionable.
Structured incident response turns a chaotic event into a managed process — reducing MTTR and protecting user trust.
Warm standby, pilot light, active-active, and multi-region failover configurations across cloud and hybrid environments.
We evaluate whether your current architecture can actually meet its recovery targets — and build what's needed to close the gap.
From tabletop exercises that surface procedural gaps to live failover tests that validate actual recovery capability.
AI-driven anomaly detection and predictive alerting help flag issues earlier, while AI-assisted first-draft RCA documentation shortens post-incident review cycles — always reviewed before it reaches you.
See how AI supports our delivery →Engagements follow a structured progression — understand the current failure landscape, design the reliability and recovery architecture, implement with measurement built in from the start, then operate with continuous improvement as the default.
Incident history, MTTR/MTTD measurement, SLO gap assessment, and DR capability review before any architecture decisions are made.
SLI/SLO definitions, error budget policies, observability architecture, and DR failover patterns — documented and reviewed before implementation.
Observability instrumentation, alerting, DR environment build, and runbook documentation — measurement built in from day one.
Load testing, chaos engineering, and live failover exercises that measure actual improvement against baseline, not just theory.
Platform instability is not bad luck — it is a predictable outcome of systems designed without reliability targets and operated without structured incident response. Most organisations treat disaster recovery as a compliance exercise: plans documented, auditors satisfied, capability unverified. We treat both differently — as engineered, practised disciplines.
Reliability targets must be defined from user expectations first, then instrumentation is designed to measure whether they're being met. An SLO not grounded in a real user journey is a vanity metric.
We design DR architectures by working backwards from failure scenarios. Every dependency is a potential single point of failure until it is eliminated or protected.
Runbooks that have never been executed under pressure will fail at the worst moment. The only credible evidence of recovery capability is a completed test with a documented outcome.
We design programmes with explicit toil reduction targets — automating operational tasks systematically and measuring the reduction in on-call burden over time.
Most organisations treat disaster recovery as a compliance exercise: plans documented, auditors satisfied, capability unverified. Resilience is an architectural property that must be designed in. Recovery is an operational discipline that must be practised until it is reliable. Resilience Designed into Architecture. Recovery Practised, Not Assumed. Operational Readiness Over Compliance.
An RTO of four hours is not a commitment, it is a target. A commitment is an architecture that has been designed, built, and validated to recover a workload in four hours under realistic failure conditions.
Resilient systems are designed by engineers who assume that components will fail. We design DR architectures by working backwards from failure scenarios, not forwards from a functioning system.
Documentation does not recover workloads. We validate recovery plans through structured testing because the only credible evidence of recovery capability is a completed test with a documented outcome.
Technical recovery capability is necessary but not sufficient. Operational readiness is built through rehearsal. Recovery discipline is practised, not assumed.
Structured service areas — each with defined scope, measurable outputs, and a senior SRE or DR practitioner accountable from assessment through to validated improvement in production.
A structured engagement to define, implement, and operationalise an SRE-based reliability programme, producing an operating model your engineering teams can sustain independently.
Design and implementation of full-stack observability, structured to surface failure signals before users notice them and correlate symptoms to root causes.
Design and implementation of the target-state disaster recovery architecture across cloud and hybrid environments.
A structured testing programme validating recovery capability under realistic conditions, from tabletop crisis exercises to live controlled failover tests.
A reliability or DR programme implemented and then left unmanaged will decay as systems change, teams turn over, and operational discipline erodes. Our managed services practice operates the capability we've built.
SRE-led managed operations — ongoing SLO monitoring, incident response, and error budget tracking as a continuous practice.
Managed cloud operations across AWS, Azure, and GCP, ensuring the layers that reliability depends on are consistently governed.
Database performance, availability, and backup operations — reliability is only as strong as its data layer.
Continuous security posture monitoring alongside reliability operations, ensuring improvements don't introduce security exposure.
A disaster recovery programme implemented and then left unattended is a programme that will fail when it is needed. DR environments drift, architectures change, and teams turn over. Our managed services practice maintains the recovery capabilities we've built through structured operations, scheduled testing, and continuous assurance.
Continuous security posture and compliance monitoring, maintaining the controls and audit evidence that underpin your DR programme's regulatory standing and board assurance.
SRE-led managed operations with SLO tracking and incident management, ensuring the primary platform your DR programme protects remains stable and measurable.
Operational control across cloud compute, storage, and network, managing the infrastructure foundations that both primary workloads and DR environments depend on.
Whether you're dealing with recurring incidents, undefined SLOs, an untested DR plan, or a platform leadership no longer trusts — let's have an honest conversation.
Two to three week assessment — MTTR/MTTD baseline, SLO gap analysis, and a prioritised improvement roadmap.
Comprehensive evaluation of your current DR capability, producing a baseline resilience posture report and gap analysis.
You speak with the senior SRE or DR practitioner who would lead your engagement — no pre-sales layer.
Every engagement is measured against one outcome: demonstrable, quantified improvement in platform reliability and recovery capability, validated in production, not just documented in a report.
Every DR and BC engagement is measured against one outcome: demonstrable recovery capability under realistic conditions. Our delivery structure ensures that what we build is documented, tested, and operationally owned before we close the engagement.
From baseline measurement through to validated improvement in production.
No engagement proceeds without a documented current-state baseline. Improvement can only be measured if the starting point is defined.
Every engagement closes with a documented comparison between baseline and final state — MTTR, SLO performance, RTO/RPO.
Improvements are validated in production, not just in a test environment. If it doesn't hold under real traffic, it doesn't count.
On-call burden and operational toil are measured at baseline and at closure. Toil reduction is a deliverable, not a side effect.
Engineering teams receive structured knowledge transfer, not just documentation. The programme must survive our exit.
SLO governance, error budget tracking, and DR testing schedules are formally handed over, with reporting your leadership can operate.
No engagement is closed without documented test evidence. Recovery capability is certified against actual test results, not architecture alone.
All deliverables are structured to support regulatory audit requirements — ISO 22301, DORA, PCI-DSS, HIPAA, and sector-specific frameworks.
They rely on the same underlying discipline — defined targets, observability, and tested execution. Treating them separately often means neither gets done well; we build both together.
Often, documented DR plans have never been tested end-to-end. We start with a baseline assessment against the existing plan to find out what's real before deciding what to rebuild.
Depends on architecture and budget — there's a real cost curve between hours and minutes of recovery, or 99.9% and 99.99% uptime. We help you find the right point on that curve for each system's actual business impact.
We recommend quarterly live failover drills and continuous SLO monitoring as standard practice, with tabletop exercises more frequently for critical systems.