Senior Ignition engineers working inside your project — your standards, your backlog, your schedule. The majority of what Artek does, and the part that ships under your team’s name rather than ours.
This is the majority of what Artek does, and it is the quietest part of the business because the work ships under your team’s name rather than ours.
The pattern is consistent: a capable internal team, a backlog longer than the people available, and one or two areas — MES, a migration, historian architecture, an ERP interface — where nobody on staff has done it before at this scale. Hiring for that takes months and assumes you can find it. We put senior Ignition engineers inside your project instead.
We are not running a parallel project alongside yours. Our engineers work in your repository, to your standards, in your process — and your team keeps ownership of the system throughout.
A lot of internal teams now move quickly with AI assistance, and that is a genuinely good thing — routine screens and scripting have got faster and we would not pretend otherwise. What tends not to keep pace is architectural coherence across a growing system, and accountability for behavior under load and failure. That is the gap our engineers are usually there to close, working alongside your people rather than auditing them. How we think about AI →
Some teams want an independent assessment of what they have built before adding people to it. That is an Ignition System Health Check. If the structure itself is the constraint, start with an Architecture Blueprint. And if the project has already stopped going well, that is a Project Rescue.
A staffing firm sends you people who are available. We send senior Ignition engineers who have built these systems for a living, several of them from Inductive Automation itself, and they arrive knowing the platform's failure modes rather than learning them on your project. We also stay accountable for the quality of what they produce — it is our name on it, not just their timesheet.
Yours. We adopt your project structure, naming, tag conventions, review process and release cadence. If you do not have those settled yet we can help define them, but we do not quietly impose an Artek house style on a system your team has to own afterwards.
It varies from a few weeks of surge capacity through a migration to a long-running arrangement where our engineers are simply part of how your team ships. We would rather start small and let it grow on the strength of the work than lock you into a headcount commitment up front.
It stays with you, which is the point. Our engineers work inside your repository and your documentation, not a parallel Artek one, and we would rather leave your team more capable than leave them dependent. Empowered customers come back for the bigger builds.
Often it does, in both directions — teams start with support and hand us a whole subsystem once they have seen how we work, and full-delivery customers keep an engineer or two on afterwards for continuity. Neither is a precondition of the other.
Twenty minutes on the phone with an engineer. Tell us what your team is building and where it's thin, and we'll tell you what would actually help.
Talk to an engineer →