AI adoption and roll-out
Make AI land in the organisation, not just in the pilot.
Readiness assessment, tool selection and roll-out, process redesign around what the tools are actually good at, an internal enablement programme, and adoption measured in changed workflows rather than seat counts.
The premise
Most AI roll-outs fail in the same way: a tool gets bought, seats get assigned, usage is reported as a success metric, and the process that surrounds the work is exactly the same as it was before. The gains come from changing the process. The tool is the cheap part.
What you get
- A readiness assessment that maps where the work actually is, which of it the current generation of tools is genuinely good at, and what your data and access model will let you attempt.
- A tool selection with the security review and the procurement position already done, including a licence right-sizing model so you are not paying for seats that log in once a month.
- Two or three workflows redesigned end to end — not augmented, redesigned — with the before and after cycle time measured.
- An internal pattern and prompt library that lives in your systems and is owned by your people, not a slide deck.
- A named internal champion in each function, trained, plus role-specific enablement and office hours until it stops being novel.
- A measurement framework reported monthly to the board in changed workflows, cycle time and rework rate.
- A written governance position: what data may go where, which tools are approved for which classification, and who decides.
How it runs
5 phases, each with a date attached.
Durations below are what this shape of work typically takes with a team of two to four. They move with scope, and the assessment is where they stop being typical and start being yours.
- 01
Assessment
3 to 4 weeksInterviews, work sampling and a look at where time actually goes. We come back with a ranked list of workflows, an honest read on which ones current tools can move, and the data and access constraints that will shape everything after.
- 02
Tool selection and roll-out
4 to 6 weeksEvaluation against your real work rather than vendor demos, a security and data protection review, procurement, deployment and identity integration. Ends with the tools in the hands of the people who will use them daily.
- 03
Process redesign
6 to 10 weeks, two or three workflows in parallelThe part that produces the return. We take a workflow apart, remove the steps that only existed because the work was slow, and rebuild it around what the tools do well. Measured before and after.
- 04
Enablement
8 to 12 weeks, overlappingChampions in each function, role-specific training built on your redesigned workflows, the internal pattern library, and open office hours. Adoption is a habit problem, and habits take a quarter, not a workshop.
- 05
Measurement and review
Ongoing, monthly reportingCycle time, rework rate and the count of workflows actually changed, reported to whoever sponsored the programme. Where a workflow did not improve, that gets reported too, with what we think went wrong.
What it costs
No rate card on this page, on purpose.
The assessment is fixed price. After that the programme is priced per stage, and the stages are genuinely separable — plenty of clients buy the assessment and the tool roll-out, run the process work themselves, and come back for enablement.
The dominant cost driver is the number of functions in scope, because process redesign does not benefit much from economies of scale: finance and engineering are different problems and one does not teach you the other. Two functions done properly beats eight done as a workshop series, and we will push you towards two.
Tool licences are bought by you, from the vendor, at your own negotiated price. We do not resell software, we do not take a referral fee, and the right-sizing work usually pays for a meaningful part of our fee out of licences you were about to over-buy.
A published day rate would be a number we could not stand behind for your specific situation, and every firm that publishes one quotes something different in the room. What we will commit to before you sign is the phase scope, the phase price and the team shape. Use the calculator for the replacement arithmetic against your own seat count.
Normally bought inside
Guide
You have a dev team. We hand them the blueprint.
Fixed monthly. 3-month minimum.
Deliver
We take it end to end and hand over the keys.
Fixed price per phase. Run priced separately.
When not to buy this
3 reasons to walk away.
Every library entry has rows where the honest answer is no. Every service page has this section for the same reason: the cases below are ones we have seen go badly, and we would rather lose the work than deliver into them.
The mandate is a seat count
If the goal handed down is a percentage of staff with a licence by a date, buy the licences and skip us. That target is achievable without changing anything, which is precisely why it is the wrong target.
Your data is not in a state to be used
If the knowledge these tools would need is in individual inboxes, a shared drive with eleven versions of the same document, and one person’s memory, the first project is a data project. We will say that, and it is not a project we will disguise as an AI programme.
You want the productivity number for a board slide
We measure honestly, which means the first measurement often shows less than the pilot promised. If the programme needs to produce a specific figure, we are the wrong firm.
Pick one contract. We will show you the replacement.
A two-week assessment: we take your single most expensive SaaS line item, establish what you actually use, and come back with a parity matrix, an architecture for AWS and Azure, a cost model and a delivery plan. Fixed price. If the answer is keep buying it, we will tell you that.