Trilateral Research
London and Waterford firm specializing in ethical AI and fundamental rights impact assessments
What is Trilateral Research?
Trilateral Research was established in 2004 and is headquartered in London, with an Irish operations center in Waterford. It began in research and data protection and now advises on responsible AI, including fundamental rights impact assessments of the kind the EU AI Act requires for some high-risk deployments. Directory estimates of its size range from about 55 to 200 people. It also builds its own ethical AI software, mostly for public-sector and law-enforcement users.
Trilateral Research works primarily with clients in Public sector, Law enforcement, Healthcare, Financial services sectors. Its primary differentiator is: Fundamental rights and ethics impact assessments from a research-led firm.
Trilateral Research tech stack and services
| Service area |
|---|
| Impact & Ethics Assessment |
| AI Governance |
| EU AI Act Classification |
| Readiness Assessment |
Trilateral Research pricing
Short answer: Trilateral Research prices its work as follows: project fees; rates on request. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed; a discovery call is required.
| Engagement model | Typical range | Best for |
|---|---|---|
| Fixed-scope assessment | Fixed fee; quoted per scope | One or a few use cases, checked before any build |
| Ongoing advisory | Retainer or subscription; not public | Governance reviews and decisions over time |
Trilateral Research pros and cons
| Advantages | Things to consider |
|---|---|
| +Two decades of research on ethics and data protection | -Small team for large multi-country programs |
| +Fundamental rights impact assessments are a core skill | -Builds its own software, which can shape recommendations |
| +Independent of the big cloud and software vendors | -Less focus on cost modeling or business cases |
Trilateral Research vs alternatives
How Trilateral Research compares to the other top AI Advisory firms.
| Company | Best for | Key difference | Rating | Compare |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| KPMG | Regulated firms needing audit-grade AI governance. | Governance and assurance depth, backed by its own ISO/IEC 42001-certified AI management system | 4.6 | Full comparison |
| Tensorway | COOs and CFOs wanting a vendor-neutral AI plan. | Two-interview method per use case, a written drop list, and a roadmap another vendor can implement | 4.5 | Full comparison |
| PwC | Multinationals mapping AI Act duties with other EU... | EU AI Act compliance planned alongside DORA, GDPR, and NIS2 in one program | 4.4 | Full comparison |
| appliedAI | German industrial firms seeking neutral AI guidance. | Advice from a German AI ecosystem with a non-profit institute focused on AI Act practice | 4.4 | Full comparison |
| Deloitte | Large regulated groups needing documented AI controls. | Regulatory and audit teams beside the AI advisers, with global reach | 4.3 | Full comparison |
| EY | Enterprises building AI risk into existing controls. | AI risk work folded into existing technology risk and controls programs | 4.2 | Full comparison |
| DAIN Studios | Nordic and DACH firms wanting governance they own. | Governance and readiness work designed to be run by the client's own team | 4.2 | Full comparison |
| Artefact | Large consumer brands across European markets. | Data governance and AI planning with engineers in the same firm | 4.2 | Full comparison |
| Gartner | CIOs and CDOs choosing AI vendors. | Analyst advice on AI vendors and governance with no implementation work to sell | 4.2 | Full comparison |
| TÜV SÜD | Firms wanting an independent AI Act assessment. | Independent testing and certification of AI systems against EU AI Act requirements | 4.1 | Full comparison |
| BABL AI | Companies needing an independent third-party AI audit. | Criteria-based third-party AI audits, separate from any design or build work | 4.1 | Full comparison |
| Sia Partners | Utilities and insurers wanting regulatory-minded advice. | Sector regulatory practices applied to AI governance, plus its own Heka.ai tools | 4.1 | Full comparison |
| BearingPoint | European banks pairing AI with regulatory reporting. | European consulting with regulatory technology products from the same group | 4.1 | Full comparison |
| PA Consulting | UK public bodies wanting advice plus delivery. | Advice from teams that also design and build, strong in UK government | 4.0 | Full comparison |
| Zühlke | Swiss and European health and finance firms. | Partner-owned advisory and engineering for regulated health and finance work | 4.0 | Full comparison |
| ML6 | Benelux firms wanting advice from builders. | Use-case discovery from engineers who also handle EU AI Act requirements | 4.0 | Full comparison |
| Eticas | Public bodies auditing deployed algorithms. | Independent algorithmic audits that measure bias and accuracy in real use | 4.0 | Full comparison |
| Advai | UK financial firms testing AI before launch. | Technical robustness testing, chosen by the FCA as partner for its AI Live Testing pilot | 3.9 | Full comparison |
| Futurice | Nordic firms redesigning services around AI. | AI strategy combined with service design and operating-model work | 3.9 | Full comparison |
| Knowit | Nordic public authorities wanting a local partner. | Nordic public-sector reach with data governance and AI under one roof | 3.9 | Full comparison |
| Saidot | Teams wanting AI inventory software with setup help. | Governance software for AI inventories and risk tracking, integrated with Azure AI | 3.9 | Full comparison |
| West Monroe | US COOs targeting operating-cost gains. | Operations and cost-led AI advice from a partly employee-owned firm | 3.8 | Full comparison |
| Elder Research | US agencies wanting a data feasibility check. | Feasibility calls grounded in three decades of hands-on modeling | 3.8 | Full comparison |
| Ekimetrics | CFOs who want AI tied to measured returns. | Return-on-investment measurement for marketing and sustainability AI | 3.8 | Full comparison |
| Slalom | North American firms wanting local consultants. | Local-office consultants for AI governance and operating models | 3.8 | Full comparison |
| Thoughtworks | CTOs judging build-or-buy on AI tooling. | Public Technology Radar and engineering-led build-or-buy advice | 3.8 | Full comparison |
| Centric Consulting | Mid-size US firms writing AI usage policies. | Acceptable-use policies and staff adoption programs for generative AI | 3.7 | Full comparison |
| RTS Labs | Small US firms testing one idea cheaply. | The cheapest entry point here, with feasibility tests in place of strategy decks | 3.7 | Full comparison |
| Future Processing | European mid-size firms on a modest budget. | AI readiness checks at published Central European rates | 3.7 | Full comparison |
Trilateral Research FAQ
What is Trilateral Research?
London and Waterford firm specializing in ethical AI and fundamental rights impact assessments
How much does Trilateral Research charge?
Pricing model: project fees; rates on request. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. A discovery call is required to get project-specific quotes.
What tech stack does Trilateral Research use?
Trilateral Research works with EU AI Act, GDPR, ISO/IEC 42001. Primary industries served include Public sector, Law enforcement, Healthcare, Financial services.
Is Trilateral Research right for enterprise?
Best for: public bodies needing rights and ethics assessments. Team size: 55–200. Key consideration: Small team for large multi-country programs.
What are the best Trilateral Research alternatives?
The best alternatives to Trilateral Research depend on your use case. Top options are:
- KPMG: governance and assurance depth, backed by its own ISO/IEC 42001-certified AI management system
- Tensorway: two-interview method per use case, a written drop list, and a roadmap another vendor can implement
- PwC: EU AI Act compliance planned alongside DORA, GDPR, and NIS2 in one program
Compare Trilateral Research with other AI Advisory firms
Verify all details directly with Trilateral Research before making a decision.