Fixed-Scope Engagement

Enterprise Architecture

An architecture that serves the organisation using it — not one that exists to be admired.

When you need this

Systems have accumulated faster than anyone has mapped them. Nobody can say with confidence what depends on what, so every change carries hidden risk, and every new initiative starts with an argument about where it fits. Or a target architecture exists on paper, drawn by people who have since moved on, and the organisation is quietly not following it.

The engagement

Mapping the estate as it actually is, not as the last diagram claimed. Identifying where complexity is earning its keep and where it is simply cost. Working with technology and business stakeholders together, because architecture decisions that only technologists sign off on rarely survive the next reorganisation.

What you receive

A current-state view the organisation can trust, because it was tested against the systems rather than assumed. A target architecture sized to what the organisation actually needs — not a reference model imported from elsewhere. A sequenced plan for closing the gap, with the trade-offs named rather than hidden in the diagram's white space.

What it changes

Change requests get evaluated against a real picture of dependency and risk, not guesswork. Complexity stops being invisible, so it stops being free.

Experience

Deep enterprise architecture experience across public sector, health, finance, telecoms, and retail. Thirty-seven years in technology across 20+ sectors, from computer operator to Group CTO.

Engagement details
Format
Fixed-scope review or ongoing advisory
Duration
Typically six to ten weeks for the initial review
Output
Current-state map, target architecture, closing-the-gap plan
Commercial basis
Fixed fee or day rate
Frequently asked

Questions people ask before booking

How long does the initial review take?

Typically six to ten weeks, whether it runs as a fixed-scope review or the start of an ongoing advisory relationship.

What does “current-state map” actually mean in practice?

A view of what the organisation's systems actually depend on, tested against the systems themselves rather than assumed from an old diagram — so decisions are made on what's true, not what's documented.

What do we receive?

A current-state view, a target architecture sized to what the organisation actually needs rather than an imported reference model, and a sequenced plan for closing the gap with the trade-offs named.

Is this a one-off review or an ongoing relationship?

Either — some organisations need the initial review only; others keep the engagement running as ongoing advisory once the initial gap is mapped.

How is it commercially structured?

A fixed fee for the initial review, or a day rate if it continues as ongoing advisory.