Buy a decision, not a discovery phase.
► View as a slide presentation
Three fixed-scope assessments. Each ends with a written baseline and a ranked, costed backlog you own outright — whether or not anything follows. No open-ended discovery, no staff augmentation dressed as consulting.
Fees are quoted per engagement against the scope below. No price list is published here because scope drives it, and a number without a scope is meaningless.
The assessments
Fixed scope. Fixed fee. Defined end date. You keep the output.
OSS Automation Maturity Assessment
For operators and network organisations who know automation has stalled but cannot say precisely where, or what to fix first.
- Baseline current automation coverage across fault, configuration and provisioning.
- Map Order-to-Activate and Trouble-to-Resolve as they actually run, not as documented.
- Score against the GVS OSS maturity rubric — every score traced to an observed input.
- Identify fallout, manual touchpoints and unowned handoffs.
- Rank the improvement backlog by effort against operational impact.
- Executive readout with the sequencing argument.
- Written maturity baseline with the rubric and the evidence behind each score
- Process maps for O2A and T2R as-is
- Ranked automation backlog with effort and impact per item
- A recommended first increment — the smallest change that proves the direction
- Executive readout deck
- Where to spend the next automation budget
- Whether a platform replacement is warranted or avoidable
AI Readiness Assessment
For organisations under pressure to deploy AI who need to know which use cases are real, which are theatre, and what has to be true first.
- Inventory candidate use cases already proposed inside the organisation.
- Test each against data availability, decision ownership and failure cost.
- Assess data readiness — quality, access, lineage, governance.
- Separate genuine automation candidates from those needing a human decision.
- Define the governance model: glass-box requirement, audit trail, escalation on model failure.
- Sequence a pilot with explicit success and abandonment criteria.
- Use-case register scored on feasibility and value, with the reasoning shown
- Data-readiness findings per candidate use case
- Governance model — traceability, human-in-the-loop points, failure handling
- One recommended pilot with defined stop criteria
- An explicit list of what not to attempt yet, and why
- Which AI investment to fund this cycle
- Whether the data foundation must be fixed before any of it works
Delivery Governance Review
For programmes that are slipping, or leaders inheriting a portfolio and needing an independent read before committing to dates.
- Review the operating cadence — what reviews exist, who attends, what they decide.
- Test RAID hygiene: are risks owned, dated and moving, or just listed.
- Check commitment accuracy against the last delivery cycles.
- Trace escalation paths and where decisions actually stall.
- Assess vendor and dependency ownership across the programme.
- Readout with the corrective actions ordered by urgency.
- Independent governance findings with observed evidence
- Cadence and escalation design, ready to adopt
- RAID and commitment-accuracy findings
- Prioritised corrective actions with owners proposed
- Pre-configured GVS IAS Office cockpit to run the cadence from day one
- Whether the current date is defensible
- What to change before committing to the next milestone
Retained advisory
For programmes already running. Priced by cadence and access, not by headcount — because the value is judgement, not seat-time.
Governance retainer
- Monthly programme review against your RAID and milestones
- Written findings after each review
- Escalation access between reviews
- Cadence and reporting design maintained as the programme changes
Architecture & vendor advisory
- Independent review of OSS/BSS architecture decisions
- Vendor proposal and RFP response evaluation
- Integration risk assessment before commitment
- Second opinion where the internal view is contested
Executive advisory
- Quarterly strategy sessions with the accountable executive
- Board and steering-committee readout preparation
- Transformation sequencing and investment argument
- Direct line for decisions that cannot wait for the next cycle
What a retainer is not
Stated up front so the commercial conversation is short.
- Not staff augmentation — no bodies placed on your programme.
- Not a 24×7 support contract. There is no on-call desk behind it.
- Not an implementation commitment. Build work is scoped separately.
- Not exclusive or open-ended — cancellable at the end of any cycle.
Why this shape
Most consulting engagements begin with a discovery phase the client pays for and cannot use if they walk away. These do not. Each assessment ends with a document that stands on its own — the baseline, the rubric, the evidence, the ranked backlog. If nothing follows, you still hold a decision you can act on with someone else.
That is deliberate. It is also the honest structure for a practice this size: fixed, finite pieces of work, delivered by the person who did the work at Tier-1 scale — rather than a promise of capacity that would need a delivery organisation to keep.