Three situations where SatoLab steps in.

Catherine runs a 35-person accounting firm in Laval. One Friday, she discovers part of her team is already using ChatGPT to draft client emails and summarize files — sometimes pasting in excerpts from tax returns. Nobody asked permission: the tools simply showed up.

Rather than ban them, she decides to equip the firm officially. Two vendors are courting her: impressive demos, productivity promises… and 40-page contracts in English she has no time to read. Between client confidentiality, her professional obligations as a CPA and Law 25, she feels like she's moving without a safety net.

In the initial consultation, we scope three low-risk use cases to start with. Comparing the vendors through a data lens reveals that one of them grants itself the right to train its models on client documents — eliminated. We draft the internal usage policy, then the deployment contract: hosting in Canada, no training on her data, acceptance criteria.

Ten weeks later, the assistant is in production, the team is trained, and no client data flows through unframed tools anymore.

Marc runs an online retail company of about twenty employees. His marketing agency delivers: traffic up 40%, AI-generated content at scale, laser-targeted campaigns. Until a customer's email lands in his inbox: “How do you know I just adopted a puppy?”

Marc digs in. The agency collects browsing data without valid consent, AI-generated product pages claim “recommended by veterinarians” though no veterinarian was ever consulted, and some generated visuals look suspiciously like a competitor's. All of it is published under his brand: if anyone gets called out, it's him — not the agency.

After the initial consultation, we audit the provider's practices: data collection, generated content, advertising claims, image rights. Then we draft a framing contract: compliance warranties, consent obligations, and a validation process for every deliverable before it goes live.

Marc kept his agency — the results were real. But he now sets the rules of the game, and his brand is no longer exposed to his vendors' shortcuts.

Sophie runs a services SME with several hundred clients. Won over by a demo, she deployed a “turnkey” AI customer-service agent. Six months later, the picture is grim: the team works around the tool, customers are complaining — the agent even promised a refund that doesn't exist in her policies.

When she asks questions, the vendor answers that “everything is compliant,” without documenting anything. Internally, nobody officially owns the project: no lead, no metrics, no contract follow-up. And nobody knows where the customers' conversations are hosted.

We take over the project through the hour bank. The audit reveals data hosted in the United States with no prior assessment — fixed with the vendor. We impose measurable performance criteria (correct-answer rate, escalation to a human), train the team and set up a monthly review.

Three months later, the agent handles most first-level requests correctly and hands off the rest. At renewal time, the contract was renegotiated on Sophie's terms — not the vendor's.