FIT CHECK
Is this a good fit?
We work with a specific kind of problem — the kind where the friction is in the architecture, not the people. If you're not sure, the intake form is the fastest path to a clear answer.
This is a strong fit if you want…
- —A system that runs without you in every room — not just when you're watching
- —Infrastructure that routes decisions correctly the first time, without exception-handling becoming your job
- —A deliverable you own at the end of every engagement — documentation, logic, protocols — not a relationship dependency
- —A methodology built inside a working regulated practice before it was offered to you
- —Clear scope and clear gates — you know what each phase produces before you commit to it
This is especially aligned for founders in professional services firms (6–20 people) where the founder is the load-bearing wall, department heads managing capable teams executing a process that was assembled rather than designed, and practices at inflection points — partner exits, acquisition conversations, growth phases that exposed what wasn't built.
See who we work with →What the engagement feels like
- —A written deliverable at every gate — you always leave with something you can reference, act on, or hand off
- —Scope is clear before money moves — the Architect engagement defines the Build before the Build begins
- —You are the approver, not the executor — we design and build; you review and approve
- —The methodology doesn't change between engagements — same frameworks, same governance principles, same quality gate
- —Nothing deploys without your sign-off
A quick self-check before you apply
Take the last two weeks of your calendar. Count:
- 1.How many meetings exist because a routing rule should have answered the question first?
- 2.How many exceptions landed in your inbox that a system should have handled?
- 3.How many things required your sign-off that didn't actually require your judgment?
If that ratio is recognizable — and if you've been living with it for more than six months — that's the coordination tax. That's the problem we map.
If the count is zero, you've already built the architecture. You may not need us.
This may not be a fit if…
- —You want staff augmentation or fractional executive support — that's a different category of help
- —You need AI tools without a governance layer or human approval gate — we don't build systems that auto-send or auto-decide without human review
- —The primary goal is headcount reduction rather than building infrastructure that makes headcount effective
- —You want to skip Diagnose or Architect and go directly to Build without a clear deliverable agreement
- —You're evaluating providers primarily on hourly rate rather than the value of the deliverable
That doesn't mean you're doing anything wrong. It means this firm is built for a specific kind of problem.
A quick note on the engagement model
Every engagement produces a deliverable you own:
| Diagnose ($2,500) | Written brief — friction map, priority, recommended path |
| Architect ($5,500) | Phased plan — deliverables, owners, timelines, success gates |
| Build (scoped) | Deployed system — documentation, self-management protocol, your architecture |
| Advisory ($3,500/month) | Ongoing structured output — available after Diagnose or Architect |
You can stop at any gate. No engagement requires the next one. Full FAQ →
Next step
If you recognize the coordination tax and want it mapped:
Work with us — start at Diagnose →If you want to understand the methodology before you apply:
If you're not sure whether this is the right category of help: the intake form is the fastest path to a clear answer. We'll tell you if it's not a fit.