Engineering consultancy — Australia

Control systems
for investment
management.

The hard problem in operational automation is the system that holds the parts together. We built for that problem, and we build on it with every client. Rigorous engineering, deep engagement with the domain, close partnership.

Business process automation, done properly, is a composition problem. The parts are the tools, the agents, the workflows, the knowledge. Creating the system that coordinates them, that evolves with the organisation, that encodes how the firm actually works — that is what we do.

Good principles are the foundation of good practice.

These are the beliefs that shape how we approach implementation — the decisions that determine whether a system holds up over time.

Implementation is the hard problem
The opportunities for automation are visible and plentiful. What is consequential is how you implement — the approach you choose, the abstractions you build on, the engineering discipline you bring. These decisions determine whether the result is a system that holds up over time or one that compounds complexity and constrains the organisation.
We think at the solution level
A system that is fully described can be reproduced exactly — on any infrastructure, at any time, by anyone with access to the packages. It can be evolved deliberately, because every change is explicit and versioned rather than an undocumented modification to something only partially understood. And it can be owned completely, because the knowledge of how it works lives in the system itself rather than in the heads of the people who built it. These three properties follow from each other. They are also, together, what genuine ownership of software means.
Operational capability compounds
The more a firm's knowledge is encoded and coordinated within a system, the more accurately that system reflects how the firm actually works — and the more valuable it becomes. Capability built this way is specific to the firm and accumulates over time.
Engineering trade-offs are economic trade-offs
Cost, value and efficiency are dimensions of technical decisions, not constraints imposed on them. Which AI model to use, how to provision infrastructure, where to place human oversight — each of these is simultaneously an engineering decision and an economic one. Good engineering produces systems that work well and spend well.
Let AI earn its place
Often the right answer is a deterministic pipeline — producing the right result reliably, cheaply and auditably. The discipline is to ask before reaching for AI, and to reach for the simplest approach that produces the required result. AI is broader than large language models, and the right model for each task is a design decision made deliberately.
Governance is architecture
The degree of autonomy granted to a workflow or agent should be proportional to the consequences of error. Outputs that re-enter the knowledge base to inform future reasoning require a higher standard of validation than outputs that leave the system. These are architectural decisions, built into the system from the outset.
Build capability
The organisations we work with understand their business — their processes, their decision frameworks, their way of thinking about their domain. Our role is to provide the platform and the methodology to make that knowledge operational. The result reflects how the client actually works, and it belongs to them.

More than a choice between AI providers.

Investment management firms frequently frame their AI strategy around tool selection — which LLM provider to use, which productivity suite to adopt. These are procurement decisions. A good AI strategy is something more substantial.

The consequences of a poorly governed AI system in investment management are real — potential losses for investors, regulatory exposure, reputational damage. Every principle in our approach addresses one or more dimensions of that risk. The question worth asking is how to build something that works correctly, governs itself appropriately and improves over time.

Starts with the business
Which processes matter, where the operational friction is, what good outcomes look like. Technology choices follow from that understanding.
Operates at the level of the whole
How automation capability is composed, governed and evolved across the organisation — not how individual tools are configured.
Accounts for the full spectrum
From deterministic quantitative pipelines and machine learning models through to LLM-powered workflows and agentic processes. The right approach for each process is a design decision, not a default.
Economically grounded
What does it cost to run, what does it produce, where does the value actually come from.
Governance built in
Which processes warrant human oversight, how the knowledge base is protected, how the system acts within appropriate authority.
Built to evolve
The technology is changing and the business is changing. A strategy that is brittle to either is not a strategy.

The solution and the capability
are the same thing.

We work with investment managers to design and build the operational systems that coordinate their business. The platform is Ergon — a business control system that supports the full spectrum from deterministic quantitative pipelines through to agentic AI coordination. Each engagement is specific to the client. The client's processes, knowledge and way of working determine what gets built.

Investment and portfolio management

The analytical core of an investment management business is where the most demanding and most valuable automation opportunities sit. Deterministic pipelines of composable analytical functions handle signal generation, factor analysis, portfolio optimisation and risk modelling — running with precision and auditability, feeding results into workflows and agents across the system. Multi-agent networks traverse large datasets to surface correlations and patterns that inform investment decisions. Predictive models for market behaviour and portfolio construction sit alongside these pipelines, available to analysts and portfolio managers as a structured starting point rather than something they have to build from scratch each time.

Inbound opportunity management is another rich area. Investment teams at active managers process a continuous flood of broker research, deal teasers, fund prospectuses and direct approaches. Classifying, prioritising and routing that material — and producing a structured first-pass assessment for anything that merits it — consumes significant analyst time. Automating triage and initial analysis, with portfolio fit modelling included as standard, means analysts start each day with a prioritised queue and a structured brief rather than an undifferentiated inbox and a blank page. Investment committee paper preparation follows the same logic: aggregating material from across the firm, drafting structured sections, routing for review — with the analyst focused on the substance of the recommendation rather than the mechanics of document production.

Capital raising and investor relations

The investor-facing side of an investment management business runs on communication — with existing investors, prospective investors and the intermediaries between them. Much of that communication is repetitive, high-stakes and time-consuming. RFP responses are a clear example: strategic documents that require drawing on perspectives from across the organisation, produced under deadline pressure, where consistency and quality vary with the individuals involved. A multi-agent system — combining agents that hold the firm's strategic positioning, its domain expertise, its compliance requirements and its editorial standards — brings the full depth of the firm to every response. Evaluating RFP responses received from external managers requires a different mode: seeing past the marketing framing to extract what the responses actually say in analytical terms.

Beyond RFPs, the same capability applies to investor targeting and prospect research, marketing material preparation and version control, pitch deck production, roadshow coordination and follow-up, capital call and distribution notices, and the ongoing work of investor communication and relationship management. These are processes that investment management firms know well and that consume more time than they should.

Operations and compliance

Investment management operations involve a significant volume of process work that is well-understood, rule-governed and consequential. Trade settlement exception handling, reconciliation workflows, counterparty onboarding, NAV sign-off processes, mandate guideline monitoring — each of these is a candidate for automation that reduces manual effort and improves consistency. Compliance monitoring sits alongside operations: continuous surveillance of portfolio positions against regulatory constraints and internal risk limits, with potential breaches identified, assessed for materiality and routed through the appropriate process. Regulatory reporting and audit trail generation are natural companions.

Across the business

The same platform and approach applies wherever a business has complex processes to coordinate. Corporate communications — board papers, regulatory filings, stakeholder communications, media monitoring. HR workflows — recruitment, onboarding, performance processes, policy management. IT operations — help desk triage and first-line resolution, incident management, change management, vendor and contract management. Knowledge management — document classification, meeting notes and action tracking, institutional memory capture. Investment management is the domain where Operative Solutions begins. The operational complexity it addresses is the complexity of running any serious business well.

We work with a small number of organisations at a time, in close partnership. Every engagement is led by the two principals. What you engage is what you get.

Engagements begin with a thorough understanding of the problem — what the business is trying to do, where the operational friction is, and what solving it requires architecturally. The system design follows from that understanding.

We treat each engagement with complete discretion and work with only one firm in any given competitive space.

Problem first
Architectural decisions follow from a clear understanding of what the business needs to do. The system design is specific to each client's context.
Built to last
Systems built using proprietary tooling, designed for the client's specific context. Maintainable, evolvable and owned by the client.
Compounds over time
The system becomes more valuable as the client's knowledge accumulates within it. The longer it runs, the more it reflects the firm's specific way of working.
Close and discreet
We work with few clients and work closely with each. Engagements are treated with the discretion appropriate to sensitive operational and commercial contexts.

Two principals with complementary backgrounds, working directly on every engagement.

Lachlan Douglas
Co-founder

Lachlan has worked in investment management for most of his career — across fund establishment, institutional distribution, infrastructure investing and operational consulting. He has worked with and advised firms across private equity, infrastructure, credit and equities management in Australia and internationally.

He holds degrees in engineering and applied finance, and has spent a number of years developing the thinking and tooling behind Operative Solutions' approach to solution composition.

Richard Heycock
Co-founder

Richard is a systems architect and engineering leader with a background in distributed systems, infrastructure engineering and platform design. He was Technical Director at Digivizer and has spent his career building systems that operate reliably at scale.

He brings the engineering depth to translate architectural thinking into systems that hold up in practice, and has been thinking about the structural complexity of software solutions for many years.

We would be glad
to have a
conversation.

The firms we work best with are thinking seriously about what AI means for their business — not necessarily committed to a particular path, but genuinely engaged with the question. We are happy to work with firms early in that process, including running workshops with teams to help frame the thinking and develop a strategy worth acting on.

When firms do move, we want the commitment to be real — resources, people, organisational support. Engagements can start with a well-chosen use case, and that is often the right place to begin. The most productive engagements are those where that first use case sits within a broader ambition.

We are drawn to organisations that recognise the problem and want to address it seriously — whether their instinct is quantitative or qualitative, whether they process numbers or documents or both. What matters is intellectual seriousness and genuine commitment to understanding what is possible.

hello@operativesolutions.com.au

All enquiries are treated with complete discretion.
Australia.