TECH STACK ADVISORY
The technology choices made early in a business’s life tend to persist long past the context that made them sensible. What worked at twenty employees creates friction at two hundred. What made sense as a startup breaks as an enterprise requirement, a compliance burden, or a scale demand the original choice was never designed to handle.
We assess your current stack, define what the next stage of your business actually needs from its technology, and produce a structured evaluation of the options, including what to keep, what to replace, and in what order.
Stack decisions made under delivery pressure without an independent view tend to be made on familiarity and vendor relationship rather than long-term fit. The cost of a wrong stack decision compounds with every system built on top of it.
STACK AUDIT & CURRENT STATE ASSESSMENT
We document your current technology estate, applications, integrations, infrastructure and data flows, and assess each component against the requirements of your next growth stage. The output is an honest picture of what is fit for purpose, what is marginal, and what is actively limiting the business.
VENDOR EVALUATION & COMPARISON
We run structured evaluations across shortlisted vendors, functional testing, reference checks with customers at similar scale, and commercial terms assessment. Vendors are scored against your documented requirements rather than against each other’s marketing materials. The output is a defensible recommendation you can take to your board.
MIGRATION PLANNING
Stack migrations that happen all at once tend to fail. We plan migrations in dependency order, with parallel running validated before cutover, and rollback routes defined before any production data is moved. The migration plan is a deliverable in its own right, not an afterthought appended to the vendor recommendation.
REQUIREMENTS DEFINITION
Technology evaluation without documented requirements produces a selection based on demos and price rather than fit. We work with your business and technical leads to define functional requirements, non-functional requirements, integration constraints and team capability, so the evaluation is against something specific rather than against a general impression.
INTEGRATION ARCHITECTURE
Stack transitions fail most often at the integration layer. We design the integration architecture before the build begins, defining how data moves between systems, where the source of truth lives for each data type, and how the new system connects to the existing estate without creating a maintenance problem that outlasts the implementation.
IMPLEMENTATION OVERSIGHT
Technology selection decisions get reinterpreted during implementation unless someone is maintaining the strategic view. We provide oversight during the build phase, reviewing architectural decisions as they are made, managing vendor scope creep, and ensuring the implementation delivers what the business case required rather than a narrower interpretation of it.
Vendor evaluation without documented requirements is a subjective exercise that produces a selection biased toward whichever vendor presents best. We document requirements before speaking to any vendor, so the evaluation is against something specific.
A technology selection that optimises for upfront licence cost often misses the integration complexity, migration overhead and ongoing maintenance burden that determine the real cost over three to five years. We model total cost of ownership, not list price.
A recommendation your team cannot execute is a report, not advice. We assess implementation complexity, identify the skills your team will need, and either source them or adjust the recommendation to match your actual capability, rather than delivering a theoretically optimal answer you cannot act on.
