Real scenarios.
Real outcomes.
Three actual situations. What happened with InekIA, what would have happened without.
M&A signal detected before public announcement.
Director of Strategy at a French midcap B2B services firm (800 employees, market with 3 dominant competitors). Goal: protect the base and seize opportunity before public disclosure.
Kairos captures in parallel: a "VP Partnerships US" job post at a competitor, a TechCrunch article mentioning this competitor "exploring strategic options", a historic client changing their LinkedIn status to "Open to opportunities", and unusual silence from the competitor’s top management (3 profiles disable recent posts).
The graph connects: US job post + article + management silence = pattern of imminent fundraise / acquisition. Historic client moving = possibly informed, seeking alternative. Impact 9/10, Urgency 8/10, Probability 78%.
Options: A. Offensive (contact 3 at-risk clients of the competitor). B. Defensive (secure 5 common clients via renewed NDAs + premium upsell). C. Passive. Kairos recommendation: A+B in parallel. Offensive ROI: 2-4 new mid-market logos if action within 3 weeks. Defensive ROI: 92% retention vs 78% without action.
Nova enriches 3 prospects. Doyer redacts 3 personalized emails (context-aware, no competitor mention). Emails sent after human validation. Moïse schedules J+4 and J+10 follow-ups. Kira analyzes exposure of the 5 existing clients, identifies 2 aggressive poaching risks.
Week +5: competitor officially announces acquisition. Week +8: 1 prospect signs (€150K ARR). 5 existing clients retained at 100%. Week +12: another competitor shows similar signals — Kairos recognizes the pattern, proposes A+B directly with 85% confidence.
€150K ARR earned on a new logo + €400K ARR preserved through retention of 5 common clients. Pattern learned by Layan for next time.
Tier-2 shutdown anticipated 5 weeks early.
Procurement Director at an industrial group (aerospace, 50-200 strategic suppliers). 90% of critical disruptions come from tier 2 or tier 3, invisible in SAP, invisible in contracts. By the time the Chilean plant closes, the disruption hits 6 weeks later.
Kairos continuously ingests: local news in native languages (Chilean, Chinese, Indian, Korean), regulatory filings, Facebook worker groups, Reddit industry subs, dropping Glassdoor ratings, announced typhoons and strikes, sanctions and tariffs, weak signals (plant reducing hours, stopping recruitment, safety incident).
The knowledge graph models: Product P1 depends on C1. C1 comes from supplier F1 (France). F1 depends on M1. M1 produced 82% by plant U1 (Chile). U1 belongs to group G1 (announced restructuring plan). You never entered any of this — Kairos built it via public-source cross-referencing.
Impact: P1 68% rupture probability, 12 impacted clients (4 key accounts = €14M/year). Emergency requalification cost < 6 weeks: €2.4M + trust loss. Proactive cost now: €380K. Options: A. Offensive (2 alternative sources India / South Africa). B. Defensive (alert 4 key accounts, preemptively renegotiate). C. Combined — Kairos recommendation.
Nova enriches 2 alternative suppliers (capacity, certifications, lead times). Doyer sends RFQs to both. Moïse tracks requalification process. Domo prepares communications to the 4 key accounts (reassuring tone, not alarmist).
Week +6: shortage confirmed in the real world. Week +7: 8 weeks of buffer stock in place. Week +10: Indian alternative qualified and operational at 94% of spec. Clients: zero visible impact, relationship preserved.
€2M saved vs "reaction" scenario (contractual penalties + emergency freight). Pattern "parent-group restructuring + regional concentration" stored by Layan. Indian source qualified for future emergencies.
Ever Given — 30 minutes to decide.
March 2021. 05:40 UTC. The container ship Ever Given blocks the Suez Canal for 6 days. 400 ships blocked, $9.6 billion/day of trade paralyzed, 6 months of global supply chain disruption. The difference between companies that survived and those that sank: detection time.
Suez Canal authority alert. Tweets from captains and maritime journalists. AIS services and satellite trajectories of 400 blocked ships. Typical cargo (public AIS + declarations). Theoretical alternative routes (Cape Route: +7-12 days).
Your Supply Graph crosses the Suez event with your chain: which suppliers have cargo currently in the zone? Which clients depend on in-transit products? How many days of stock on each impacted reference? Answer in 15 minutes, not 2 days.
Immediate impact: 14 cargoes from your suppliers in the zone, 4 finished products at rupture risk in 3-5 weeks, 8 clients to notify including 2 under strict SLA. Options: A. Reserve Cape Route capacity (x2.5 freight, available now). B. Activate buffer stocks. C. Notify 8 clients with mitigation plan. D. A+B+C in parallel — recommendation. Critical window: 6h before alternatives saturate.
Alternative capacity reserved before the rush (saturated at T+18h, price x4 at T+36h). Buffer stocks activated. Factual, reassuring email sent to 8 exposed clients. Internal statement prepared for the board. Meanwhile, your competitors are learning the news in the media.
Crisis management cost: €120K of freight surcharge. "Normal reaction" scenario: €800K-€1.2M of penalties + emergency freight. This gain is not due to a magic tool. It is due to 6 hours of lead time over the competition.
€120K surcharge vs €1M disaster. The difference: 6 hours of early detection. Pattern "systemic crisis → Cape Route activation" saved by Layan for future events.
Without InekIA. With InekIA.
- T+24hLearn via media
- T+48hCrisis cell convened
- T+72hPanic mode — alternatives saturated
- Week +6Contractual penalties triggered
- T+30 minDecision proposed by Kairos
- T+45 minAgents execute on validation
- T+6hCapacity secured, clients reassured
- Week +1Measured outcome: €1M avoided