Case Studies

What actually changed on site.

Every deployment here started on cameras the site already owned. These are the outcomes the safety teams measured afterwards, each one attributed to the deployment it came from.

Deployments, and what they moved.

Each case study covers the risk the site was carrying, what the detection layer changed, and who acted on what it found.

40%faster incident response
Construction · Singapore

HDB Construction, Singapore

Public housing estate construction, watched around the clock through the CCTV already on site.

60% fewer incidents8x observations
Read the case study →
80%fewer floor incidents
Logistics · Global

Global Logistics Operator

Forklift and pedestrian conflict across dock and aisle cameras on the warehouse floor.

30% faster response85%+ accuracy
Read the case study →
54%fewer acknowledged findings
Civil Construction

Civil Construction Programme

Deep shafts, tunnel headings and launch chambers across a multi-contractor civil programme, monitored on cameras already installed.

Shift coverageSupervisor routing
Read the case study →

The same layer, measured differently

Each site measures what its own risk register cares about. These are the figures the deployments on this page reported.

60%
Fewer incidents, HDB construction
80%
Fewer incidents, global logistics
8x
More observations than manual patrols
85%+
Verified detection accuracy

See it on your own site

A proof of concept on a handful of your existing cameras, tuned to the risks that matter on your site, live within 24 hours of camera access.

Get a Demo Talk to Sales
Method

How these numbers were measured

Every figure on this page came off a live site, not a benchmark reel. Each percentage compares six months before the detection layer went live against the six months after, on the same site. This is how the numbers were produced, so you can judge them the way your own risk register would.

Measured on the site's own footage

Detection thresholds are tuned on real footage from the site before anything is counted. On the civil programme, underground scenes needed several weeks of real footage before the thresholds were usable, and full coverage took two months. Numbers reported before that tuning would not have meant anything.

Six months before, six months after

The percentage changes compare a six month period before the detection layer went live against the six months that followed on the same site. A window that length matters on a construction programme, because a shorter one would just be measuring the weather and the build stage rather than the intervention.

Compared against the patrol regime it replaced

The observation figures compare continuous camera coverage against the manual patrol routine the site was already running. That is where 8x more observations than manual patrols comes from on the HDB estate build: the same site, the same risks, a different amount of looking.

Every detection kept as evidence

Each detection is stored as a timestamped clip, so an event exists as evidence rather than as an anecdote. The counts on this page are drawn from those records, which means they can be re-checked rather than taken on trust.

Accuracy verified per site

Detection accuracy of 85%+ is verified on live footage from the deployment itself, per risk type, rather than quoted from a model benchmark. Accuracy is re-checked as a site changes, because an estate build at handover does not look like the same site at structure stage.

Scope of the evidence

What these deployments do and do not show

Three deployments, three sectors, one layer of the platform. Being specific about the edge of the evidence is part of the evidence.

What is proven here

The detection layer, running on cameras the sites already owned, across estate construction, warehouse logistics and underground civil works. Continuous coverage, alerts in under a second, and evidence retained per event.

What is newer

Autonomous patrols, self-closing corrective actions, continuous risk scoring and generated briefings build on top of detection. They are part of the platform, and they are not what these three deployments measured.

What varies by site

Camera placement, lighting and scene type change what is achievable. Detection trained on rooftop and facade footage read underground scenes badly until it was retuned on site. Expect a tuning period, not a switch.

Evaluating this against other options

The questions that come up most often when a safety team is comparing platforms.

Do we need to replace our cameras?

No. Any camera with an RTSP stream connects, and standard deployments need no new hardware and no new cabling. All three deployments on this page ran on cameras the site already owned.

How long before it is running?

A standard site is live within 24 hours of camera access. Tuning to a specific site, particularly unusual scenes such as underground works, takes longer and is worth doing before anyone counts results.

Does our footage leave the site?

Processing runs on site through edge or on-premise deployment. Footage does not need to leave the site to be analysed, and detection keeps running if the uplink drops.

How accurate is it, really?

85%+ verified detection accuracy, measured on live footage from the deployment itself and tuned per site, per zone and per shift rather than quoted from a benchmark.

How does an alert reach the team?

WhatsApp, Microsoft Teams or email in under a second, routed through your escalation chain, with the video evidence attached so nobody has to hunt for the footage.

Can we test it before committing?

Yes. Run it on your own recorded footage first and see the detections on your own site before spending anything. How pricing works sets out the four things that drive cost.

In Their Words

What the safety teams said

Quoted with permission from safety leads on live deployments. Attributed by role at their request.

Invigilo gives us much better visibility on what is happening on site, so we can pick up safety issues earlier and act before they become bigger problems.
Safety Manager
It helps our team see risks that would otherwise be easy to miss, and gives us the information we need to respond much faster.
Safety Manager
With Invigilo, we have a much clearer picture of what is happening across the site and where we need to focus our attention.
Safety Director
Invigilo has helped us move from reacting to incidents to spotting risks earlier and dealing with them before something happens.
Safety Director