Industry focus / Manufacturing and Automotive
Aevis operates the enterprise technology around manufacturing and automotive businesses — the systems that plan, order, schedule, track and account for production — and holds the boundary with plant and engineering environments deliberately rather than by accident.
Connect what should be connected. Be explicit about what must not be.
A line that stops is the only measure that matters.
IT and OT connected on purpose, not by default.
Support that arrives at the plant, not only at head office.
One service view · one decision trail
Sector pressure
Enterprise systems, plant systems, engineering platforms and suppliers form a single chain from order to despatch. They are supported by different teams under different assumptions, and the chain only reveals itself when a link fails.
An outage that would be a ticket elsewhere is lost production here, with a recovery cost that continues after the system comes back. Priority cannot be set by system criticality alone.
Does the incident model know which systems stop a line?
Plant networks, historians, control systems and engineering workstations were built to different standards by different people, and the connections between them and enterprise IT have usually accumulated rather than been designed.
Is every crossing of that boundary documented and owned?
Plants, warehouses and distribution centres carry their own connectivity, endpoints and support expectations, often with no permanent IT presence and shift patterns that do not match a service desk’s hours.
How does a night shift get help when something stops?
EDI, portals, logistics and supplier systems are part of the operational chain. A partner interface that fails quietly becomes a stock or scheduling problem long before it looks like a technology problem.
How long would a silent interface failure go unnoticed?
Operating agenda
These capabilities are designed as one operating system. Each can begin as a focused engagement, but the value compounds when service, workplace, integration, security and delivery share the same governance spine.
Operate infrastructure, cloud and applications around the business services production depends on, with priority set by operational consequence rather than by system tier.
Operate the endpoints, shared terminals, scanners and access the plant floor uses, with a support model that reaches sites rather than expecting them to travel to it.
Strengthen the interfaces between ERP, MES-adjacent systems, logistics, EDI and supplier platforms so a failure is isolated and visible rather than absorbed.
Bring monitoring, access control and response readiness to the enterprise estate and to the documented crossings into plant environments, with engineering ownership respected throughout.
Turn requests, incidents, problems, changes and control tasks into connected workflows with clear accountability across corporate and site boundaries.
Modernise the reporting, planning and shop-floor-adjacent applications in controlled increments, without asking production to absorb an unsafe cutover.
Control by design
Manufacturing already runs on documented, auditable process on the production side. The gap is usually on the technology side, where change is recorded less rigorously than the output it affects.
Risk posture, service health, investment decisions and accepted exceptions.
Ownership, dependencies, levels, changes, incidents and recurring risks.
Requests, engineering work, approvals, testing and release evidence.
Events, logs, performance, security signals, capacity and configuration state.
Responsibility boundaryPlant control systems, safety instrumented systems, process engineering and production safety remain the client’s and its engineering function’s. Aevis operates enterprise technology and the documented interfaces to those environments within the agreed responsibility model, and makes no functional-safety, process-control or machinery-certification claim.
Manufacturing contexts
The production model and the estate determine the control boundary. We shape the engagement around the service model, the sites, the technology estate and the suppliers already in place.
Operate the planning, scheduling, quality and traceability systems behind build-to-order and just-in-time production, where a supplier interface is part of the line.
Scheduling · traceability · supplier flowSupport batch, recipe and reporting systems in environments where a stoppage is expensive to restart and change windows are genuinely narrow.
Continuity · change windows · reportingProvide consistent operations and support across plants, warehouses and distribution centres with different connectivity, staffing and shift patterns.
Consistency · site reach · shift coverOperate the compute, storage and collaboration platforms behind CAD, simulation and product data, where file size and access speed are the daily experience.
Performance · collaboration · IP protectionEngagement path
The first job is to understand what stops production, who owns each part of the chain and where the IT/OT boundary actually falls. Technology choices follow that operating brief.
Define the business service, production impact, stakeholders and non-negotiable constraints.
Service briefTrace technology, data, suppliers, controls, IT/OT crossings and operating dependencies.
Dependency mapSeparate urgent exposure, structural weakness and modernisation opportunity into an agreed sequence.
Roadmap and measuresEstablish ownership, governance, transition controls and the delivery or operations cadence.
Mobilisation planRun the service, review evidence and feed operational learning into the next improvement cycle.
Governed service cycleDesigned outcomes
Baselines and targets are agreed for each engagement. We do not import generic percentages into a production environment and call them a business case.
Coverage of services mapped to production consequence, with owners.
Detection, escalation and restoration performance by site and shift.
Failure detection, isolation and replay across partner exchanges.
Documented, owned crossings as a proportion of those found.
Measures are defined with the client and depend on scope, baseline quality, data availability and the responsibilities assigned to Aevis.
Relevant services
Industry context changes how the work is governed and measured. The underlying capabilities can be contracted together or as a focused intervention.
Testimonials
Each testimonial is tied to the service it refers to, so service pages can draw the relevant one automatically.
The change we noticed first was not technical. It was that there was finally one person to call, and that person already knew the history of the problem.
They rebuilt the service catalogue around how our teams actually work rather than how the platform was shipped. Adoption stopped being an argument.
We had the security tooling before Aevis arrived. What we did not have was anybody turning what it produced into decisions.
Frequently asked questions
The useful answers depend on the operating boundary. These are the principles we use before a detailed assessment establishes the exact scope.
No. Plant control systems, safety instrumented systems and process engineering stay with your engineering function and its specialist vendors. What we operate is the enterprise estate and the documented interfaces between it and those environments — which is usually where the unowned risk actually sits, because nobody has treated the crossings as a thing with a name.
It is a question rather than a verdict. Connections made deliberately, documented and monitored are a design; connections that accumulated over a decade are an unknown. The mapping stage names each crossing, who owns it and what it carries, so that segmentation work afterwards is a set of decisions rather than a survey.
Usually, and it is the design constraint rather than an aspiration. Incremental delivery, parallel running and acceptance at each stage exist precisely so that a cutover is never the first time the new path carries real work. Where a stoppage genuinely cannot be avoided, that should be a stated finding early rather than a surprise late.
With a support model designed around the site rather than around head-office hours: shift-aware coverage, local hands where the estate needs them, remote capability for everything that does not, and clear escalation for the cases where a night shift cannot wait until morning. What is provided is set out in the service agreement rather than implied.
Yes, and a single site is often the right pilot. A recurring stoppage cause, a failing supplier interface or a site support problem are all sensible entry points. We still map adjacent dependencies so the local fix does not create a hidden failure elsewhere.
No. No technology provider can guarantee either. Aevis supports the operations, engineering, evidence and improvement practices within the agreed scope; the organisation retains responsibility for production safety, regulatory interpretation, formal compliance and business risk decisions.
Manufacturing and automotive enquiry
Bring us one recurring stoppage, one integration problem or one modernisation priority. We will use the first conversation to establish the service boundary, the IT/OT line and the evidence already available.