Mandates
Fixed-scope mandates: specific, high-stakes structural and commercial problems. Three to six months, a measurable outcome agreed up front, day rate or fixed fee. No open-ended discovery, no retainer.
Technology spend rationalisation
When
Technology costs have grown faster than the business, or a transaction needs margin quickly. In most estates I review, 15 to 25% of the annual software commitment is unused, duplicated or contractually misaligned. The spend is rarely the problem. Nobody has compared what is used with what is paid for.
What you get
Lower structural cost, usually within 90 days: fewer suppliers, shelfware gone, contracts matched to real need. Savings that survive after I leave. Most recently: more than $15m of licence cost optimisation identified for a global information services group.
Governance reset and risk
When
The board cannot see technology risk, or an audit is coming. It usually surfaces in due diligence, after an acquisition, or when a vendor announces a compliance review. Licence entitlements, deployment data and contracts sit in different places and have never been reconciled.
What you get
A governance framework that works, software asset management that holds, and a commercial position that stands up to a vendor audit. Board reporting that puts technology risk in financial terms. Most recently: a service platform governance framework for a global manufacturer, covering demand, change, licensing and partner management, ahead of a corporate separation.
Separation and integration
When
A deal depends on technology coming apart, or going together, without stopping the business. Licence disaggregation, which entity keeps which entitlements and at what cost, is underestimated until it is on the critical path.
What you get
Transitional service agreements run properly, licences separated cleanly, and a day-one operating model that lets each business run on its own from legal completion. No surprises at closing. Currently: licence disaggregation and platform separation for a two-entity divestiture of a global manufacturer. Previously: post-acquisition integration across 400 offices, and the technology workstream of a major outsourcing transfer, from both sides of the table.
Vendor negotiation strategy
When
A major renewal is coming and the internal team lacks the leverage, the benchmarks or an independent view. Microsoft and ServiceNow account teams are good at this. Going in without equivalent preparation is a mismatch, and the vendor knows it.
What you get
An independent negotiation position with no platform allegiance and no channel conflict: what you are entitled to, what you have deployed, the licensing structure that fits the business after the change it is going through, and a walk-away position with a credible alternative. Most recently: Microsoft enterprise agreement restructuring and renewal strategy for a global manufacturer ahead of separation.
Service platform strategy
When
ServiceNow, or its equivalent, has become a cost centre rather than a lever. Licensing has grown faster than adoption, the managed service partner is governed by invoice rather than outcome, and nobody can say what the platform is for beyond tickets.
What you get
A roadmap tied to the operating model, governance over demand, change, licensing and partner performance, and a value case that stands up to the CFO. Most recently: platform strategy and governance for a global manufacturer, including a self-service programme that cut demand on a per-ticket outsourced service desk, and platform separation for a two-entity divestiture.
If one of these sounds familiar, twenty minutes will tell us both whether there is a fit.
Talk to Andrew