Excellence programmes and service-quality ratings, from the first criterion to the final report — on one secure platform
Tamayuz runs excellence awards and Service Excellence assessments in one system: framework and criteria, nomination and evidence, assessment, results and star rating, and improvement plans — instead of spreadsheets and scattered email. Scoring is computed on the server against the framework’s weights, and an audit trail sits behind every action.
For government, semi-government and large private organisations in the UAE and the Gulf.
This page marks what works today and what is planned but not built yet.
Service Excellence programme — 2026 cycle
Overall rating4 of 5 stars
Areas × service channels
Happiness centre
Call centre
Website
App
Leadership
4
3
4
2
Processes
3
4
3
3
Environment
2
3
3
4
People
4
4
2
3
An illustration of how results are presented in the product, not a screenshot.
“The race for excellence has no finish line.”
— H.H. Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum
Quoted to frame our own argument. It implies no endorsement, sponsorship or affiliation.
If the race has no finish line, measurement cannot be a season that precedes an awards ceremony. It is continuous work: a stable framework, evidence gathered as it is produced, results compared with the last cycle, and an improvement plan that carries into the next one. Tamayuz is built around that.
Who it is for
Five operating models, one product. Three questions set the model: who owns and operates the programme, who is assessed, and what kind of outcome it produces. Many organisations live in more than one of them in the same year: an internal award, a readiness run for an external award, and a programme across a group. The chip on each model says what the platform runs today; the line under it says what is still missing.
01
Internal self-managed
●Available today
Your excellence office runs your programmes itself: it sets the framework, opens the cycle and assesses your own employees, teams, units and service centres.
Who runs the programme
The organisation’s own excellence office
Who is assessed
Its employees, teams, units and service centres
What comes out
An internal award or an internal rating
Works today on the platform’s foundation: one workspace for the organisation, with its own database. Which features each module gives you is in “Two modules, one platform” below.
02
Readiness for external awards
●Available today
You measure yourself against an external award’s framework before you apply — with your own excellence team, sometimes with an advisor — to see where you stand and what to fix first.
Who runs the programme
Your excellence team, sometimes with an advisor
Who is assessed
The organisation and its units, against an external framework
What comes out
An internal diagnostic (a mock assessment), never an official result
Works today: the award’s framework is set up in the platform and the result stays inside the organisation; nothing leaves it but the submission pack you choose to send. The result is an internal diagnostic. We are not party to any external award and we issue no official result in its name.
03
Award body
●Available today
The award secretariat runs a programme for participants from outside it — entities, companies, individuals and teams — and compares them against a published framework.
Who runs the programme
The award secretariat
Who is assessed
Outside participants: entities, companies, individuals and teams
What comes out
A competitive award, or an official rating in tiers
Works today: the participant portal, a nomination per participant, a reasoned eligibility decision, assessment and results, and no participant can see another’s file. Planned and not built yet: jury sessions, winner approval and certificates.
04
Managed service provider
●Available today
The client owns the programme and the provider operates it on the client’s behalf — assessing the client’s own staff and units, or the entities that client serves.
Who runs the programme
The client owns the programme; the provider operates it
Who is assessed
The client’s staff and units, or the entities the client serves
What comes out
Agreed with each client
Works today as a separate workspace per client, each client’s data isolated from the others, with the provider’s staff invited into each workspace under their own account there. Planned and not built yet: linking a provider to its clients for one subscription and a single licence report.
05
Network — parent and subsidiaries
●Available today
The parent runs one group-wide programme and compares its subsidiaries, while each subsidiary runs its own internal programme at the same time.
Who runs the programme
The parent for the group-wide programme; each subsidiary for its own
Who is assessed
Subsidiaries and their units
What comes out
One unified award or rating that compares the subsidiaries
Works today when the group is the workspace: the group-wide programme and each subsidiary’s own programme live in it, kept apart by programme-scoped permissions, so no subsidiary sees another’s data. Planned after the first release: a separate workspace per subsidiary with an aggregated view for the parent across all of them.
The models overlap and none of them rules out another: an organisation can run its internal programme and prepare for an external award in the same year. The core is the same throughout — frameworks, cycles, participants, evidence, assessment, results and audit — and what changes is who owns the programme, who is assessed and who sees what.
What stays the same in every model
A participant sees its own file and nothing else
●Available today
Permissions are checked on the server for every record, so no participant reaches another’s file or another’s result, whichever model the programme runs under.
Guidance is one content set for all
●Available today
The guidance attached to a criterion belongs to the framework and every participant sees the same text; anything specific to one participant is a recorded clarification request, not a side conversation.
Whoever advises does not assess
○Planned
The advisor role and the disclosure register that records a conflict of interest are planned and not built yet; today this is handled by how assessors are assigned by hand.
An audit log for every decision
●Available today
Who did what and when, with the values before and after, in a chain that reveals a later edit.
This section is about running programmes, not about where the platform itself runs. Hosting — our cloud or an install on your own servers — is a separate question, and any of the five models works either way: Where the platform runs
The award cycle today: spreadsheets, email, scattered evidence
Excel files in several versions, evidence spread across inboxes and shared folders, and scores that vary by assessor. The result: heavy administration, and less trust in the outcome.
Scattered spreadsheets
Scores are calculated in a file on each assessor’s machine, the formula differs between files, and nobody is certain which version is final.
Evidence in email and folders
Attachments arrive by email and land in shared folders, so linking a document to the criterion it supports is guesswork — and proving what was submitted before the deadline is harder still.
Inconsistent scoring
Every assessor reads the scale slightly differently, so scores on the same criterion diverge with no way to moderate or explain them.
No trail to fall back on
When a result is challenged, it is difficult to show who changed what and when, or which evidence a score rested on.
One source of truth
In Tamayuz the framework, the evidence, the scores, the results and the improvement plans sit in one place. Scoring happens on the server against the framework version bound to the cycle, the calculation trail is kept, and actions are written to a hash-chained audit log that reveals later tampering.
Two modules, one platform
The core is shared — frameworks, cycles, participants, evidence, assessment, results and audit. The modules differ in what is assessed and how the outcome is announced.
Awards
●Available today
Excellence awards for individuals, teams and organisations: categories and candidates, a nomination filled in by the candidate’s representative, a reasoned eligibility decision, and competitive ranking where the programme calls for it.
Available today: categories, candidates, the nomination form, eligibility, assessment and results. Planned: jury sessions, winner approval and certificates.
Categories and candidates
●Available today
Categories with one level of sub-categories, candidate types for individuals, teams and organisations, and one nomination per candidate per cycle.
A typed nomination form
●Available today
Typed fields (text, number, date, choice, file) filled in by the candidate’s representative in the participant portal, and locked on submission.
Eligibility decision
●Available today
Accept or exclude with a written reason and the option to reopen; only an eligible candidate is assessed or has results published.
Jury and winners
○Planned
Jury sessions, winner approval and certificates are planned and not built yet.
Service Excellence
●Available today
Star-rating assessment of service quality across an entity, its sub-units and its service channels, from framework to improvement plan.
Available today, end to end: framework, participants, evidence, assessment, results, improvement plans and reports.
Sub-units and service channels
●Available today
Entities with sub-units (service centres, branches) and service channels, with a bulk import from Excel.
Maturity × evidence quality
●Available today
Each criterion scores from a maturity level and an evidence-quality level, computed on the server against the framework’s weights, with the calculation shown.
Heat map and star rating
●Available today
Results as an area × channel heat map, an average per entity, and a star classification against the framework’s thresholds.
A plan that carries forward
●Available today
Gaps become actions with an owner, a due date and a status, updated by the participant and tracked by the programme team into the next cycle.
How it works
Five steps that repeat every cycle, each with an owner and a date.
1
Framework and criteria
Your office builds the criteria tree with its weights, the maturity scale, the evidence-quality scale and the star thresholds or award bands. The framework is configuration, not code, and weights must total 100% at every level.
2
Nomination and evidence
Participants upload evidence against the criteria in their own portal within a defined submission window, with clarification requests recorded between assessor and participant.
3
Assessment
The assessor works in one place with the evidence and the scoring panel side by side: a maturity level and an evidence-quality level per criterion, with notes, strengths and areas for improvement. An assessor sees only what was assigned to them.
4
Results and star rating
The server computes the result and shows it as a heat map, averages and a star rating or rank, exportable to Excel or to a bilingual PDF report.
5
Improvement plan
Gaps become a plan of actions tracked into the next cycle, so each cycle starts from the last one instead of from a blank page.
AI drafts. People decide.
○Planned
The AI layer in Tamayuz is planned and not built yet. These are the rules it will be built to, taken from the product requirements rather than from a marketing promise:
AI suggests, a person decides
○Planned
AI never approves a score, rejects a submission, or changes a permission or a weight. Official scoring stays on the server, against the framework.
Grounded in evidence
○Planned
Every finding cites the document and page it came from, inference is separated from evidence, and missing data is stated rather than filled in.
Inside the permissions
○Planned
AI reads only what the current user may read, in their own tenant, programme and cycle, through the same authorised interfaces as the screens.
Switchable off, and logged
○Planned
The layer is optional per tenant and per programme and off by default; the product is complete without it, and every AI action is written to the audit log.
AI draft
Criterion 2.3: measuring customer satisfaction
The evidence shows a regular quarterly measurement with root-cause analysis. It does not show the results being linked to an approved improvement plan.
Source: Satisfaction report 2026, page 12
ApproveEdit
An illustration of the planned AI card pattern. The feature is not available today.
Security and trust: what is built, and what is planned
Tamayuz was rebuilt after a security review of the two legacy systems found no server-side authorization and scoring done in the browser. What follows is the platform as it stands today, with anything planned marked as such.
Server-side checks on every request
●Available today
Permissions are checked on the server for every action and every record, never in the browser. An assessor sees their assignments; a participant sees their own file.
Each organisation’s data isolated
●Available today
A separate database per organisation, resolved from the host name alone rather than from anything the browser sends, with automated tests that attempt to cross the boundary.
A hash-chained audit log
●Available today
Who did what and when, with values before and after, linked in a hash chain that reveals later edits and can be verified.
Account protection
●Available today
A password policy, lockout after failed attempts, optional two-step verification (TOTP), and rate limits on sign-in, password reset and invitations.
Single sign-on
○Planned
Sign-in through UAE Pass and Microsoft Entra ID is planned and not built yet; today sign-in is by email and password.
Data residency in the UAE
○Planned
The plan is for subscription data to be hosted in a UAE region, and for an on-premises install to stay on the customer’s own infrastructure. The platform is not deployed to any production environment yet.
Accessibility
We build Tamayuz to WCAG 2.1 AA: sufficient contrast, keyboard-only use, screen-reader labels and correct right-to-left behaviour. No independent accessibility audit has been carried out yet.
Certifications
[certification pending]
Tamayuz holds no security or compliance certification today, and we will not claim one we do not have. A third-party penetration test before the first live deployment is part of the product requirements.
Where the platform runs
The same software either way. What differs is where it is installed and who keeps it running, updated and backed up. This is a hosting choice; it changes nothing about how you run your programmes.
Cloud subscription
○Planned
We host and operate the platform; each organisation gets its own subdomain and its own isolated data.
A subdomain and a separate database per organisation
●Available today
Built into the foundation: the organisation is resolved from the host name and its data lives in its own database.
Per-organisation branding
○Planned
Logo, colour, name and a custom domain are planned and not built yet.
Operations, updates and backups on us
○Planned
The subscription is not open yet and the platform is not deployed to a production environment.
On-premises install
○Planned
The same software installed on the organisation’s own infrastructure, able to run with no internet connection.
Installed on your servers
○Planned
Container images with a documented install, and upgrade and rollback when needed.
Runs offline
○Planned
Email, SMS and AI are optional outbound connections that can be switched off entirely.
Integration, migration and training
○Planned
Active Directory / Entra ID and UAE Pass integration, migration from existing systems, framework content setup, training and support tiers.
Who runs the programme, who is assessed and what comes out of it is a different question, and nothing to do with where it is hosted: The five operating models
The cloud subscription’s plans and pricing have a page of their own, and so does the government and on-premises offer; both are linked from the top and the foot of every page.
Customer references and quotes
Placeholders. Tamayuz has not launched commercially and there is no customer we can name. We will not show a logo, a quote or a number that was not given to us explicitly.
Customer logo slot — placeholder
Customer logo slot — placeholder
Customer logo slot — placeholder
Customer logo slot — placeholder
Customer quote slot — placeholder, to be replaced by a real quote with its author’s written permission.
Name, role and organisation — placeholder
Frequently asked questions
Is the platform genuinely Arabic, or a translated interface?
The interface and the reports are Arabic and English together, and right-to-left is built into the foundation rather than added on top. Each user picks their language, and reports are produced in both.
Can we use our own framework?
Yes. The criteria tree and its weights, the maturity and evidence-quality scales and the star thresholds are all configuration set by your office, not written into the code. The framework version bound to a cycle is locked, so it cannot shift once assessment has started.
Where is our data stored?
With an on-premises install the data stays on your own infrastructure. For the cloud subscription the plan is a UAE region; the subscription is not open yet and the platform is not deployed to production.
Who can see what?
Permissions are checked on the server for every record: an assessor sees their assignments, a participant sees their own file and their results once published, and organisations never see each other’s data. Exports and actions are written to the audit log.
Is AI compulsory?
No. The layer is not built yet, and when it is it will be off by default and can stay off. The product is complete without it.
What is the state of the product today?
The Service Excellence module works end to end, and the Awards module is built as far as eligibility decisions and results. The platform is not deployed to production and the subscription is not open. This page marks plainly what is available and what is planned.
Ready for a more disciplined excellence cycle?
We can walk through the platform on a prepared demonstration programme or on your own framework, in Arabic or English, and talk about the way of running it that suits your organisation.