CompaniesTawtheiqEnterprise governance · 2024 — 2026

Every decision in the room, on the record.

Tawtheiq treats a meeting as a lifecycle rather than an event — agenda, attendance, discussion, vote, action, approval — and keeps every step attributable. Two years of Flutter work, with an AI copilot that operates the system by chat or voice.

Meetings run
Approval time
Organisations live

Figures pending. This page argues from what shipped, because that is what the record holds. Before launch, ask the client for two numbers — meetings run through the platform, and approval time before and after. Nothing is published here until one of them is confirmed.

App screenshot to comeThe meeting record — ideally the agenda view and a decision under vote, side by side.16:9 · source: partner portfolio captures, pending client clearance
Placeholder — real captures exist in the partner's portfolio and need clearing before they go up.
— The question

What happens to a decision after the meeting ends?

Minutes get typed up somewhere. Actions get remembered by whoever remembers them. A month later nobody can say who agreed to what, on what date, or whether the thing was ever formally approved. The meeting itself was governed — chaired, minuted, attended by the right people. The record of it was not.

That gap is where most meeting software stops, because most meeting software is a document. It captures the discussion and then hands the outcome back to email. Tawtheiq's premise is that the decision is the artefact, not the notes: a vote taken inside a fixed window, by named roles, producing an action with an owner and an approval chain.

The distinction matters most in the organisations that need it most — committees, boards, public bodies — where "who approved this" is a question with consequences, and the honest answer today is usually a search through someone's inbox.

— What was built

Twelve capabilities, one lifecycle.

Each of these exists because a step in the lifecycle needed it. None of them is a module you switch on separately — an action item cannot exist without the decision it came from, and a decision cannot close without the vote that carried it.

  • Agenda builder. Topics with time allocated to each, so an hour-long meeting is planned as an hour.
  • Attendee roles. Chairperson, reporter, secretary and member — each with its own permissions over the record.
  • Timed decision voting. Accept, reject or abstain inside a fixed window, with an anonymous-ballot option.
  • Action items. Derived from decisions, tracked by completion percentage, with attachments.
  • Multi-level approval. Minutes and actions route through a review chain rather than one signature.
  • Digital signature. Drawn or uploaded, captured against the approval it belongs to.
  • Azure AD sign-in. Plus fingerprint and face recognition on the device.
  • Committees and teams. Each with its own scope, description and permission set.
  • Search and filtering. Across meetings, decisions and actions, with several match modes.
  • Microsoft Teams integration. Meetings created in Teams carry through into the record.
  • Notification preferences. Push, email and SMS set per channel rather than one global switch.
  • Multi-account sync. One person, several organisations, with granular privacy settings.
— The copilot

An assistant that acts, not one that summarises.

Tawtheiq Copilot answers questions about meeting status, creates action items and approves minutes — through chat or a spoken command. The distinction worth naming is that it operates the system rather than describing it. Same permissions, same approval chain, same audit trail as a person tapping the buttons.

That constraint is the interesting engineering. An assistant that only reads is easy to add and easy to ignore. One that writes into a governance record has to be bound by every rule the record already enforces — which is why the copilot sits behind the same role model as everything else, and why an anonymous ballot stays anonymous to it.

Voice and chat are an interface to the workflow, not a summary of it.

Why this is the line that matters. Most "AI in the product" is a chat box bolted to a search index. The test is whether the assistant can complete a task the product exists to do — and be held to the same rules when it does.

— Trust

Who signed it, and how you know.

Sign-in runs through Azure AD, so the app inherits the organisation's own directory rather than keeping a second list of who works there. On the device, fingerprint or face recognition stands between a borrowed phone and a signature.

Approvals are captured with a digital signature, drawn or uploaded, attached to the specific approval it belongs to. Decisions can be put to an anonymous ballot inside a fixed voting window — which means a vote cannot be quietly reopened once it has closed, and that is the property the whole record depends on.

  • Flutter
  • Dart
  • Bloc
  • Azure AD
  • REST API
  • Firebase
  • AI integration
  • Biometrics
Role
Mobile app development
Period
2024 — 2026
Platform
Flutter, one codebase, iOS and Android
Availability
Private enterprise deployment — distributed inside the organisation against its own directory, so there is no public store link.
— Contact

Let's keep in touch.

Most of our work starts with a conversation. Tell us what you're working on — or just introduce yourself and we'll do the same. We answer in a day, usually less.

[email protected]

No form, no funnel — that address reaches us directly.

See what we build for mobile
— Enterprise workflow on mobile?

Approval chains, directory sign-in and an audit trail that holds up — on a phone. That is companies-side work, and the companies page has the rest.

For companies