Technology & Product Engineering
KYIRON is a technology company building custom software, mobile applications and AI automation — alongside our own products. We start with the business problem and choose the technology second.
Custom software
Mobile applications
AI & automation
Backend & APIs
Grouped by the problem they solve, not by the technology behind them. Most engagements draw on more than one.
Four things we hold to, because the alternative has cost us or someone we know time and money.
Most software fails because it solved the wrong thing well. We spend the first conversations on how your business actually operates — where the time goes, what breaks, who works around what — and only then decide what to build.
We build our own software, so we build client work the same way: versioned, documented, tested against real use. The goal is a system your team can operate and extend, not a handover you are afraid to touch.
Automation is worth it when it removes hours from a week or errors from a process. We are specific about where a model or a pipeline helps, and equally specific about where a plain script or a better form would do the job.
Clear architecture, readable code, real documentation, and deployment you can reproduce. Whether we keep working together or not, you own something a competent engineer can pick up.
No discovery phase that bills for a month and produces a slide deck. You should know the shape of the work before you commit to it.
A working session on the problem, the constraints and what success looks like. You leave with a written scope, an architecture sketch and a realistic timeline — before any commitment to build.
Data model, interfaces, integrations and failure cases decided up front. Interface work runs in parallel so you are reacting to something real, not a document.
Short cycles with something usable at the end of each. You see progress in a running environment continuously, not in a status report.
Deployment, monitoring, documentation and handover. From there we either step back or stay on for ongoing engineering — your call, not a locked contract.
Published rather than hidden behind a form. These are the figures we are genuinely willing to start at, and they are negotiable — the real number comes from a written scope, agreed before you commit to anything.
One process automated properly, or a focused internal tool that removes a recurring manual job.
From 1 to 2 weeks
Best if a specific task is eating hours every week
A first working version people can actually use — the part that proves the idea, not a prototype that gets thrown away.
From 4 weeks
Best if you are launching something new
Continuous work on a system that already exists — new capability, security updates, and fixing what the first version got wrong.
Monthly, cancel any time
Best if something is live and needs to keep improving
These are starting points, not fixed quotes, and they are negotiable. What a project actually costs depends on scope, and we would rather agree a price against a written scope than give you a number now and revise it later. If your budget is below these figures, tell us anyway — we will say honestly what is possible within it rather than turn the conversation down.
Tell us your budgetBuilding and running our own products keeps us honest about what it takes to operate software, not just ship it.
An orchestration layer for business operations. Connects the systems a company already uses, moves data between them on defined triggers, and hands the judgement-heavy steps to a language model where that genuinely helps.
Operations teams carrying repetitive multi-system work
The part of every SaaS product that is identical and still takes months: tenancy, authentication, roles, billing, onboarding and an admin surface. Built once, properly, so product work starts at the part that is actually differentiated.
Founders and product teams launching a web application
The cross-platform foundation we build client applications on. Offline storage, synchronisation, authentication and release tooling solved once and carried between projects rather than rebuilt each time.
Used internally on KYIRON mobile engagements
Engineering briefs describing systems we design and why they are built that way. We do not publish client names or numbers we cannot evidence.
A team receives work through email and forms, re-keys it into two internal systems, and tracks status in a shared spreadsheet. The process is slow, the spreadsheet drifts out of date, and nobody can answer where a given request is without asking someone.
Re-keying disappears, status is answerable from one place, and failures surface as alerts instead of being discovered weeks later.
Staff working away from reliable connectivity need to record work as it happens. A connection-dependent application means either paper and later re-entry, or lost records.
Work is recorded once, at the point it happens, and reaches the back office without a second data-entry step.
A growing product keeps customer data in one shared schema, handles permissions in application code, and requires an engineer to run a query whenever the support team needs an answer.
Support answers its own questions, engineering stops running ad-hoc queries, and adding a customer is configuration rather than a migration.
Not claims about how good we are. Commitments you can point at if we fall short of them.
Code, infrastructure and documentation, in accounts registered to you. No licence and nothing that requires us to stay.
You get a written scope, an architecture sketch and a realistic timeline before there is any obligation to build.
Every enquiry is read by the people who would do the work, not routed through a sales inbox.
If your problem does not need custom software, or we are not the right people for it, we will say so and point you somewhere better.
Happy to sign an NDA first. We never publish client names or project details without written permission.
Short cycles with a running environment you can open at any time, rather than a status report describing one.
If yours is not here, ask it directly — we would rather answer than have you guess.
Starting points are published on the pricing section of the home page, in the currency and rates that apply where you are — automation and internal tools at the low end, a first working version of a product in the middle, ongoing engineering as a monthly amount. Those are floors rather than quotes: what your project costs depends on scope, and we agree a fixed price against a written scope before you commit to anything. Everything is negotiable — if your budget is below them, say so and we will tell you honestly what is possible within it rather than pad the number or turn the conversation down.
A small automation or internal tool can be one to two weeks. A first working version of a product starts around four weeks and grows with scope — a larger platform is closer to three months. We break the work into short cycles with something usable at the end of each, so you are never waiting months to find out whether it is going the right way.
You do, completely, including the repository, the infrastructure configuration and the documentation. We hand over accounts in your name rather than ours. There is no licence, no lock-in, and nothing that stops another engineer picking it up.
That is a normal place to start and a good reason to talk early. Working out the right shape of a solution is the first thing we do anyway. Often the honest answer is that you need less software than you thought, or a different thing entirely, and we would rather tell you that than sell you the wrong build.
Your choice. We can hand over completely, stay on for a fixed monthly amount covering fixes, security updates and small changes, or return for defined pieces of work as you need them. Nothing is a locked contract, and nothing in the codebase depends on us staying.
Yes. Most of the work is remote regardless of location, and we are used to running projects across time zones with written updates and a running environment you can check any time rather than status meetings.
Often, yes. We start with a short review of the existing code and infrastructure and tell you honestly whether it is worth continuing or whether rebuilding a part of it will cost less than maintaining it. Inheriting a system is normal work, not a special case.
Tell us the number. A smaller budget usually means doing less rather than doing it worse — one workflow instead of five, one platform instead of two, the part that pays for itself first. We would rather scope something real to your budget than turn the conversation down or quietly cut corners to hit a figure.
Yes, before any detailed discussion if you prefer. We do not share client information, publish client names without permission, or use your project as a case study unless you have agreed to it.
Tell us what the problem is. If we are the right people for it, we will tell you how we would approach it. If we are not, we will tell you that too.