A senior engineering firm, built to stay.
Silvatron is a Melbourne firm that takes a brief from first conversation to production system, then keeps that system running.
Engineers first,
agency second.
We were set up to hold long-lived systems for organisations that cannot afford to lose them. That shapes everything from how we scope to who you talk to.
Silvatron delivers Salesforce platforms, applied AI and research that ends in something deployable. Most of our work is regulated or operational: platforms a state government agency runs its programme on, systems a manufacturer quotes and ships from, applications field crews depend on with no signal.
We are deliberately not a large firm. Engagements are staffed by senior people who stay on them, which is why several have run for years rather than a quarter. You get the same technical lead through discovery, build and support, and the people who scope the work are the people who deliver it.
The three practices sit in one team on purpose. A Salesforce estate with document intelligence behind it, or a research question answered by the engineers who would build the production version, is work that usually gets split across three suppliers and loses its context at every handover. We hold it in one place.
We take a position rather than an order. If the brief will not survive contact with your data, your users or your release process, we say so before the proposal, not after the first increment.
On team pages
We do not publish headshots or a headcount. Buyers evaluating us get something more useful: the engineers who would do the work join the first technical conversation, and named curricula vitae go into any proposal where you need them.
The firm, on the record.
The details a procurement team asks for first.
Company detail
Entity
Silvatron Pty Ltd, an Australian proprietary company
Base
Office 4492, Ground Floor, 470 St Kilda Road, Melbourne VIC 3004
Delivery
Melbourne and Sri Lanka, on one delivery structure
Practices
Salesforce delivery, AI engineering, applied research and development
Delivering since
2021, with engagements still running from that year
Sectors
State government, regulated manufacturing, field operations, technology products
Two countries,
one delivery team.
Australian accountability with engineering depth behind it. Not an offshore handover, and not a body shop.
Accountability sits in Melbourne
Architecture, client relationship and delivery ownership are held here, in your time zone and under Australian law.
- A named technical lead accountable for the system
- Solution design, estimates and release decisions
- Australian contracting entity, Australian jurisdiction
- On-site presence in Melbourne where the work needs it
Engineering depth in the same team
Our Sri Lanka engineering team works to the same standards, the same backlog and the same review gate as the Melbourne side.
- Development, configuration and test engineering
- Substantial working-hours overlap with Australian business hours
- One backlog, one definition of done, one review process
- Access granted per engagement, never pooled across clients
Client data access follows the engagement, not the org chart. Where a client requires work to stay in one country, or inference to run in a nominated region, we structure the engagement that way and write it into the agreement. Our security practice sets out how that is controlled.
2021
Delivering production platforms since
3
Practices, one delivery team
5yr+
Longest continuous engagement
AU·LK
Melbourne base, dual-region delivery
How we engineer.
Six positions we hold on every engagement. They are the reason the work holds up under audit, handover and time.
The brief is a hypothesis
We test what you asked for against the problem behind it before we commit to a plan. If the cheaper answer is a smaller piece of work, we say so.
Write the decision down
Architecture, data model and integration boundaries are documented as they are settled, so the reasoning survives staff changes on both sides.
Quality assurance is inside the team
Testers work alongside the engineers through the increment, not as a gate bolted on at the end of the plan.
Ship in increments that can be reversed
Small releases, environment separation and a rollback path. Nothing reaches production that we cannot take back out of it.
AI must earn its place
We apply models where they remove real effort, with evaluation, provenance and cost control designed in. Where a rule engine is the right answer, we build a rule engine.
Stay after go-live
Support, release management and the next increment are part of the work. Several of our engagements have run continuously for years.
What the engagement
feels like.
A straight account of what you get and what we need from you. Both sides of that are what keep delivery predictable.
Clarity, early and in writing
- A written view of scope, risk and sequence before code starts
- A named technical lead who stays with the engagement
- Demonstrable increments, not status decks
- Direct access to the engineers doing the work
- Documentation and handover material you own outright
- An honest position when the answer is less work, not more
A decision maker and real access
- One person on your side who can settle a decision
- Access to the system, the data shape and the people who use it
- Timely feedback at review points, so increments stay short
- Early sight of compliance, security and procurement requirements
- Agreement on what done means before the increment starts
Talk to the people
who would build it.
Send the brief, or the constraint behind it. The first conversation is technical, and it is with the engineers who would do the work.