Dilaig vs audit cabinet conseil : pourquoi l'automatisation change tout pour les PME
Un audit AI Act traditionnel en cabinet conseil coûte 15 000 à 50 000 € et prend des mois. Dilaig génère les quatre documents obligatoires en moins d'une heure. Voici ce que cela signifie concrètement pour les PME.
If you are responsible for AI Act compliance at a small or mid-sized company, you have probably had some version of this conversation: a law firm or consulting firm quotes you €15,000 to €50,000 for an AI Act compliance audit, proposes a 12-week timeline, and says the deliverables will include a readiness assessment report and "recommendations for next steps." But not the actual documents.
This gap — between expensive, slow consulting processes and the actual mandatory documents you need — is exactly what Dilaig was built to close. This article explains the difference honestly, including where each approach excels and where each has limitations.
What the AI Act Actually Requires
The EU AI Act does not require organisations to purchase consulting advice or commission compliance audits. What it requires is specific documentation. For providers of high-risk AI systems, the four mandatory documents are:
- Technical Documentation (Article 11, Annex IV)
- EU Declaration of Conformity (Article 47, Annex V)
- Instructions for Use (Article 13)
- Conformity Assessment (Article 43)
For deployers of high-risk AI in public bodies or public interest services:
- Fundamental Rights Impact Assessment — FRIA (Article 27)
The compliance goal is possessing these documents, keeping them accurate, and producing them on demand to national market surveillance authorities. The route to these documents is less important than whether they exist, are complete, and are accurate.
The Traditional Consulting Route
How it works
A consulting firm or law firm engagement for AI Act compliance typically involves:
- Kick-off workshop with your legal, technical, and product teams (1–2 days)
- Internal interviews and system inventory mapping (2–4 weeks)
- Gap analysis report comparing your current state to AI Act requirements
- Workshops to review the gap analysis and prioritise remediation
- Optional: assistance drafting some or all of the mandatory documents
The genuine strengths
Bespoke complexity handling. For organisations with genuinely unusual systems — AI that sits at the edge of multiple regulatory frameworks, systems embedded in complex products already regulated under MDR or the Machinery Directive, or systems with contested risk classifications — experienced human counsel offers judgment that no automated tool can fully replicate.
Board-level communication. A partner-signed compliance opinion or board report from a recognised law firm has a particular value in certain governance contexts — investor due diligence, regulatory dialogue, or M&A processes.
Jurisdiction-specific guidance. The AI Act will be enforced differently across EU member states in ways that are still being worked out. A local law firm in France, Germany, or Italy may offer guidance on national implementation nuances that generic tools cannot yet reflect.
The genuine limitations
Cost. A small AI startup or a mid-sized SaaS company paying €20,000–40,000 for AI Act compliance documentation is spending a significant fraction of a junior engineer's annual salary on document production. For many SMEs, this cost is prohibitive.
Time. A 10–14 week timeline for documentation that needs to be in place before a product ships is frequently incompatible with product development cycles. The compliance work either delays the product or the compliance gets deferred indefinitely.
Deliverables. Many consulting firms provide assessment reports and recommendations, not ready-to-submit regulatory documents. You may receive a detailed analysis of what your documentation should contain — but still need to write it yourself or commission a second engagement to produce the actual documents.
Knowledge decay. An engagement completed in Q1 2026 may not reflect AI Office guidance issued in Q2. Consulting deliverables are static; they do not update when the regulatory interpretation evolves.
The Dilaig Route
How it works
Dilaig's 50-question audit takes approximately 45–60 minutes to complete. It asks structured questions about:
- The AI system's intended purpose and context
- The data used to train and operate the system
- The risk management measures in place
- Human oversight arrangements
- Deployment context and affected populations
- Fundamental rights considerations
The audit then generates four mandatory documents:
- Technical Documentation (Annex IV)
- EU Declaration of Conformity (Annex V)
- FRIA (Article 27) — for deployers
- Transparency Notice (Article 13/50)
Documents are structured to the exact requirements of the relevant articles and annexes.
The genuine strengths
Speed. Four mandatory documents in under an hour. This is compatible with product development timelines, procurement processes, and procurement due diligence requests that arrive on short notice.
Cost. A fraction of a consulting engagement. This makes EU AI Act compliance achievable for startups, SMEs, and early-stage AI companies that would otherwise lack access to adequate compliance documentation.
Regulatory precision. The audit questions and document templates are built directly from the AI Act's text — Articles 9–15, 27, 47, Annexes III, IV, V. There is no interpretive layer that could drift from the regulation.
Repeatability. When your system changes, re-running the audit takes minutes, not weeks. This makes the Article 18 obligation to keep technical documentation current genuinely manageable.
Version history. Each audit generates a dated, versioned document set. This provides an audit trail demonstrating that documentation was reviewed and updated over the system's lifecycle.
The genuine limitations
Complex multi-regulatory scenarios. For an AI system embedded in a Class IIb medical device, the compliance documentation must satisfy both Annex IV of the AI Act and Annex II/III of the MDR. Generating and reconciling documentation across two complex regulatory regimes is a more complex challenge that benefits from legal review.
Contested classification decisions. If you genuinely cannot determine whether your system is high-risk, or if you have a strong argument that an Annex III exemption applies under Article 6(3), an automated tool cannot make that legal argument on your behalf. A compliance opinion from legal counsel carries more weight in a regulatory dialogue.
Board-level governance documents. Dilaig generates regulatory compliance documents. A board-level AI governance framework, AI ethics policy, or investor-facing compliance statement is a different category of document that requires different authorship.
Who Should Use Dilaig, and When
Dilaig is the right choice for:
- Startups and SMEs with high-risk AI systems that need compliant documentation before August 2026
- Product teams that need documentation to accompany a product launch or API release
- Procurement teams that need to verify a supplier's AI Act compliance quickly
- Compliance officers maintaining documentation currency across a portfolio of AI systems
- Any organisation that needs to demonstrate basic compliance without allocating €20,000+ for a consulting engagement
Supplementing Dilaig with legal counsel makes sense for:
- Initial classification decisions where the system genuinely sits at a borderline
- Organisations preparing for direct regulatory dialogue or supervisory review
- M&A due diligence where a compliance opinion from recognised legal counsel is expected by the counterparty
- Multi-regulatory scenarios (AI Act + MDR, AI Act + GDPR-sensitive systems)
These are not mutually exclusive. Many organisations use Dilaig to generate their documentation baseline and engage legal counsel to review and sign off on the final package for the highest-stakes use cases.
The ROI Calculation for SMEs
For a startup with two AI systems, both high-risk:
| Cost item | Consulting route | Dilaig route |
|---|---|---|
| Documentation production | €25,000–40,000 | Under €1,000/year |
| Time to first compliant document | 10–14 weeks | Under 2 hours |
| Update cost when system changes | €5,000–15,000 additional | Included |
| Translation to maintain documentation | Separate engagement | Integrated |
The numbers speak for themselves for most SMEs. The question is not whether automated documentation is "as good" as a consulting engagement in every scenario — it is whether a small company can afford to delay compliance or skip it entirely because the consulting cost is prohibitive.
Start Your Free Audit
Dilaig's 50-question audit is available at no cost for your first system. Experience the documentation output before committing.
Start your free AI Act audit at dilaig.com and generate your compliance documents today.
FAQ: Dilaig vs. Consulting for AI Act Compliance
Q: Can documents generated by Dilaig be used in a formal regulatory submission? Yes. Dilaig's documents are structured to the exact requirements of the AI Act articles and annexes they address. They can be submitted to national market surveillance authorities, included in notified body review packages (where the notified body reviews the provider's own documentation), and used in procurement due diligence.
Q: Does using Dilaig mean we don't need legal counsel at all? Not necessarily. For straightforward high-risk AI systems with clear Annex III classification, Dilaig can produce all required documentation without supplementary legal input. For complex or edge-case scenarios, Dilaig reduces the scope of legal work needed — and the cost — by handling the bulk documentation while legal counsel focuses on judgement calls.
Q: How does Dilaig stay current with AI Act guidance updates? Dilaig's audit questions and document templates are updated as EU AI Office guidance, GPAI Code of Practice updates, and delegated acts are published. Documents generated after a template update reflect the current state of guidance.
Key Takeaways
- The AI Act requires specific mandatory documents — not consulting advice. The route to those documents matters less than whether they exist and are accurate.
- Traditional consulting routes offer genuine value for complex, multi-regulatory, or board-level governance scenarios — but cost €15,000–50,000 and take months.
- Dilaig generates four mandatory AI Act documents in under an hour at a fraction of consulting cost, making compliance achievable for SMEs and startups.
- The two approaches are complementary: Dilaig for documentation production and currency, legal counsel for classification edge cases and high-stakes regulatory engagements.