From Kafka to Kite: A Bold, Stupidly Simple Vision for Compliance Intelligence

Talk to anyone working in compliance or regulatory affairs in the physical world, and you’ll hear the same thing: it feels like a maze. Information is opaque, insights are difficult to access, and processes are hard to navigate. It often feels slightly absurd…Kafkaesque, you might say.

Well, it’s not a coincidence. The structure of the system makes it so.

The regulatory patchwork that governs the physical world is a layered accumulation of regulations, standards, and enforcement bodies–each introduced to solve a specific problem, each rational on its own terms. A safety concern prompts a regulation, a standard clarifies expectations, a certification body defines how to verify compliance, and authorities incorporate those requirements into law. Over time, responsibilities spread across organizations with overlapping but incomplete mandates. No single entity holds the full picture, and what emerges is a self-perpetuating labyrinth whose logic cannot be understood from any single vantage point.

Let me introduce the cast of characters.

• Regulators: There are roughly 19,000 Authorities Having Jurisdiction (AHJs) in the U.S. alone, operating across local, state, and federal layers. The structure fragments responsibility. Legislators write the laws. Regulators translate them into enforceable rules. AHJs apply them locally, but not uniformly. They amend, delete, and add provisions outright. What begins as a common baseline is reshaped at every layer, across laws, regulations, guidelines, and court decisions that are rarely integrated or streamlined.
• Standard Development Organizations (SDOs): SDOs, of which there are hundreds in the US alone, are nonprofits that write the safety standards governing everything from electrical equipment to building systems to consumer electronics. Standards are developed through consensus-based committees of manufacturers, regulators, labs, and industry experts, a process that brings genuine technical rigor but also concentrates influence among stakeholders with vested interests in the outcome. The resulting documents are typically sold as paywalled PDFs, which means the foundational rules governing entire industries are not freely accessible to the people who need to follow them.
• Testing, Inspection, and Certification (TIC) Bodies: Bureau Veritas (founded 1828), SGS (1878), TÜV (1866), UL (1894), and Intertek (1885) were all founded in the 1800s as guardians of public safety, independent arbiters ensuring products and systems meet the standards of the day. That mission endures, but running a modern testing operation requires an enormous physical footprint of specialized chambers, high-voltage bays, and accredited facilities around the globe. SGS alone operates 2,500+ labs across 115 countries and spends roughly a quarter-billion dollars annually maintaining that infrastructure. At that scale, the financial imperative is clear: maximize utilization and keep the chambers full. That backlog that extends lead times? It’s a feature, not a bug.
• Consultants: Many consultants are former regulators, lab engineers, or standards committee members. Their experience is invaluable, but the intertwining relationships can make the system difficult for outsiders to navigate. Add in the fact that consultants typically bill based on time and materials, and it is easy to see how the system gets further tilted towards complexity.

Each stakeholder has built tools in their own self-interest: systems and portals for managing standards, tracking certifications, and defining product requirements. The proliferation of tools, and the fiefdoms of knowledge behind them, creates the maze.

Consider when manufactured products are components of larger infrastructure. A battery energy storage system doesn’t just need product-level fire safety certification. It must also satisfy evolving standards like NFPA 855, generate regulator-ready reports, and adapt as climate resilience requirements expand the compliance scope. It’s a fractal problem: fragmented standards, siloed data, and no single point of gravity organizing it all around the project that actually has to get built.

A standard changes and you find out because someone forwarded an email. Approval status lives in column AF of the master spreadsheet. It's a hodgepodge that breaks the moment anything changes.

The Simple Vision: Build for the Protagonist.

Who is it that ultimately needs to navigate the regulatory patchwork described? Did we forget the main character in this story?

In my humble opinion, the protagonist is the person who is building, innovating, deploying the physical products and infrastructure that move society forward. That’s who we want to build for at Kite Compliance.

The questions are simple enough:

What does it take to get my product or project to market safely? What are the requirements for approval and market acceptance? How do the requirements affect design?

Clear answers are surprisingly hard to find. The information exists, but rarely in one place. The logic exists, but must be reconstructed from fragments.

Kite is built on a simple idea: if the knowledge embedded across standards, regulators, certification bodies, and experienced professionals can be organized into a coherent intelligence layer, navigating compliance should feel less like solving a maze and more like reading a map. We’re building that infrastructure across energy, construction, consumer electronics, and other sectors where regulatory approval determines market access.

Three convictions guide us:

• Data gravity follows the product, not the standard. Compliance intelligence surfaces when and where it's relevant, organized around what you're actually building.
• Expert judgment is irreplaceable. We work with regulatory professionals who have spent decades interpreting standards, sitting on UL and ASTM committees, and negotiating approvals with AHJs. Our AI workflows are built to capture and amplify that judgment, not replace it.
• Incentives must be aligned. Traditional consulting reward complexity. We are building a pricing model that rewards clarity, forward progress, and real-world outcomes, not more hours worked.

We are building Kite Compliance to make the rules of the physical world clear and trusted, so the people bringing new technologies into the world can move forward with confidence. We believe compliance intelligence should not only be accessible but should be embedded up and down a supply chain and throughout organizations to eliminate unnecessary rework, risk, and delay.

What has to change beyond Kite.

Unlocking the full potential of compliance and permitting intelligence requires cooperation across the ecosystem. Standards Development Organizations hold the foundational knowledge that defines safety across industries. Regulators and regulatory experts hold the hard-won judgment that determines how those standards are interpreted and applied in the real world. If that knowledge remains locked inside paywalled PDFs and scattered institutional memory, the system will continue to function as it always has. It will be opaque, fragmented, and unnecessarily slow.

If you are a regulatory expert who wants to see your expertise amplified and scaled, we want to work with you. If you are part of a standards body whose mission is to advance safety and adoption, we want to collaborate. And if you are building products or infrastructure in the physical world and want to help shape a clearer compliance system, we want to hear from you.

For too long, compliance has felt Kafkaesque because no one built it for the people who actually have to navigate it. We are building Kite Compliance to change that and make compliance more legible.

It’s time to move from Kafka to Kite.

‍