For HCM & payroll platforms

Turn checkbox attestation into evidence that survives an audit.

Your platform already owns the compliance workflow: policy acknowledgements, mandatory training, annual attestations. All of it records that a screen advanced. Tadeus embeds a real-time voice agent in that workflow, so your customers can test whether employees actually understood the obligation and hold a timestamped record that stands up when someone probes it.

Start for free Talk to us about embedding Tadeus

No audio kept · No video · No emotion inferred from voice

Why the checkbox era is ending

In force

Article 50 AI disclosure duties apply from 2 August 2026, provable per person, per conversation

In practice

Auditors now test whether a control worked, not whether a record of it exists

Audio retained or emotions inferred, designed clear of the EU AI Act's Article 5 line

The evidence gap

A ticked box proves a click. It proves nothing else.

Your customers run their compliance programmes through your platform. When an investigator works backwards from an incident, the completion data it produces answers a different question than the one being asked.

Completion is not comprehension

The employee who read every clause and the one who scrolled to the button produce the same record: a timestamp and an accepted status. Nothing distinguishes them.

Auditors test practice, not paper

The DOJ's compliance guidance asks how training effectiveness is measured. A completion log documents the theory of a control and says nothing about the practice.

A checkbox can be faked

Attestation can be delegated, clicked through in seconds, or completed without reading a word, and the record looks identical either way.

Language breaks the record

OSHA's test is comprehension in a language the employee understands. An English module completed by a crew that works in Spanish is a citable violation with a 100% completion rate.

Understanding decays

Retention approaches zero within 30 days of training. A one-time attestation captures a single day and assumes it holds for the year.

The gap lands on the platform

When completion data fails under audit, the customer asks why their system of record could not produce better evidence. That question is aimed at you.

How it works

Comprehension testing inside the compliance workflow.

Tadeus runs as an embedded conversation layer in your platform, so the attestation moment becomes a short voice conversation and the record it produces is evidence.

01
Define the control conversation
Set what an employee needs to understand for each policy: the obligation, the situations where it applies, and what to do when it does. Define it once, for every market.
02
Employees explain it back
A short voice conversation in the employee's own language asks them to describe the obligation in their own words. Paraphrase is the oldest comprehension test there is, and a checkbox can never collect it.
03
The agent probes the gaps
It discloses that it is an AI, follows up where an answer reveals a misunderstanding, re-explains the point, and flags what it cannot resolve.
04
A compliance record comes back
What was asked, what was said, when the disclosure happened, and where understanding broke down, structured per person, policy, and site.
05
Gaps become the work queue
Customers see which teams and policies need another pass, fix them, and re-run to show the movement. The gap surfaces in a conversation they control instead of an audit they don't.

What your platform ships

Compliance posture, tested for real.

The same layer that verifies policy comprehension stays embedded for onboarding, change, and every future attestation cycle, so audit-grade evidence becomes a product capability instead of a services add-on.

Evidence instead of attestation theatre

Replace completion logs with records showing what each person was asked, what they said, and what they understood.

Built inside the AI Act lines

Voice only, with no audio retained and no emotion inference. Disclosure is delivered and logged in every conversation, as Article 50 now requires.

Comprehension in every language

70+ languages handled natively, which is what a comprehension standard actually demands of a global workforce.

Posture by segment

Customers see which sites, teams, and policies are genuinely understood and which are carrying silent exposure.

Embedded in your product

Tadeus runs inside your platform, so the evidence ships as a feature of the system of record your customers already trust.

Ready for what's next

Article 50 duties are live now, and record-keeping obligations for high-risk workforce AI arrive in December 2027. The record is built for both.

Built for the question auditors actually ask.

The shift is from proving a control existed to proving it worked. That changes what the record has to hold.

1 click

Everything a completion log can prove, whatever the employee understood

Per person

Disclosure and comprehension evidence, exportable per conversation

70+

Languages handled natively, same conversation design

Audio retained or emotions inferred, by design

Built for regulated workplaces

Compliant by design, not by disclaimer.

The EU AI Act prohibits emotion inference in the workplace from February 2025. Tadeus was built clear of that line from day one, so the hardest question an enterprise buyer asks is already answered.

No audio retained

We work from the transcript. Raw audio is never stored.

No video or faces

Voice only. No facial biometrics, nothing the camera captures.

Comprehension, not emotion

We read what was said, not feelings inferred from how it sounded.

Configurable by region

Region-gated controls so EU deployments stay clear of the AI Act line.

GDPR-aligned · We do not train models on your data · Data encrypted in transit and at rest

FAQ

Questions teams ask us first.

Why isn't completion data enough for compliance anymore?

The people reviewing the evidence changed the question. The DOJ's compliance programme guidance asks how training effectiveness is measured and distinguishes functioning programmes from paper ones. OSHA's standard tests whether training was understood, not delivered. A completion log proves delivery. When an incident is reconstructed, the question is what the person understood, and completion data cannot answer it.

What does the conversation record actually contain?

What was asked, what the employee said in their own words, the timestamped AI disclosure, where understanding broke down, and what was clarified in response. It is structured per person, policy, and site, and readable by an auditor without the vendor in the room.

Is the voice agent itself compliant with the EU AI Act?

Tadeus was built clear of the Article 5 workplace emotion-inference prohibition from day one. No audio is retained and nothing is inferred from tone, stress, or mood; comprehension is judged from the content of the answer. Article 50 disclosure is delivered and logged in every conversation. Customers should still confirm their specific deployment with their own counsel.

Can Tadeus be embedded inside our platform?

Yes. It runs as an embedded conversation layer inside your product or alongside it, so comprehension evidence ships as a capability of the system of record rather than a separate tool your customers have to buy and reconcile.

Does testing comprehension mean surveilling employees?

No. The record is a comprehension artefact, not a behavioural profile. It holds what was asked and what was said about the policy, nothing about the person beyond their stated understanding, and no audio is kept.