Most clients come to us at a moment of uncertainty — a contract about to be signed, a project that has started to feel off, a go-live date that is moving for the wrong reasons, or a board that is asking AI questions the implementation partner isn't equipped to answer. The first conversation is always a no-obligation discovery call, typically thirty to forty-five minutes, where we listen to where you are and give you an honest assessment of whether and how we can help.
If there's a fit, engagements are structured as fixed-fee, limited-term commitments — scoped to what you actually need, not open-ended retainers designed to extend themselves. A Pre-Contract Risk Assessment, for example, is typically a two-to-three week engagement. An In-Flight Health Check can be completed in under a week. The longer Implementation Success Partnerships run for the duration of your active project, with a defined scope and a fixed monthly fee. In every case, the engagement letter states the fee, the deliverables, and the end point — before work begins.
The services below are organised by project phase. Most clients engage us for one specific need and expand from there. Some engage us across multiple phases. A few come to us after go-live, when the gap between what was promised and what was delivered has become impossible to ignore.
Wherever you are in the journey, the place to start is the same: a conversation.
The most underserved phase. Decisions made before the implementation begins determine most of what happens during it. A dollar of independent advice here is worth ten dollars of remediation.
An Independent review before vendor conversations begin. Realistic cost and timeline benchmarking. TCO and ROI conversations. Scope sanity check. Identifies assumptions that will not survive contact with a real implementation. Selection process best practices. The critical internal readiness conversation.
Vendor-neutral platform evaluation. Some of the strongest credentials in market for D365 F&SCM selection. Requirements definition, vendor scoring, RFP quality assessment, reference checking. Expertise in identifying when D365 F&SCM is — and is not — the right fit.
Independent review of the selection process itself: well-structured, genuinely vendor-neutral, likely to produce a good decision? Review evaluation criteria, scoring frameworks, and vendor access. Can be engaged alongside a selection consultant or independently.
The highest-stakes decision in the project. More predictive of outcome than the choice of software. Market assessment, partner capability evaluation, interview facilitation, contract review. Includes team verification, assessment of the partner’s pricing model stability and how risk is allocated in the proposed contract.
Detailed review of the proposed SOW, contract terms, resource plan, and implementation approach before signing. Identifies clauses most likely to cause problems — including terms that shift risk to the client in ways the partner’s previous contracts may not have. Scores against known failure patterns. Delivers a clear proceed / renegotiate verdict.
The active phase. The implementation partner is executing — but you need independent eyes watching the project, reviewing decisions, and producing a frank point of view regarding risks and opportunities, internal and external blockers of success.
Assessment of a project in progress. Identification of scope drift, budget pressure, resourcing gaps, data quality problems, and risks that the project teams' reporting is not surfacing. Root cause analysis. Can be engaged at any point.
Review of material change orders before the client responds. Each item scored against: Is this change genuinely needed? Does it clean or contaminate data? Will this process survive AI? What does it cost to maintain through upgrades?
Structured assessment immediately prior to go-live. Data quality, training completion, process adoption, contingency adequacy, rollback readiness. Independent verdict — not the implementation partner’s schedule-pressured one.
For projects already in trouble. Fast, honest diagnosis. Three clearly framed options: recover, restructure, or stop — with cost and probability of success for each. Board-ready recommendation. Optional: direct representation in vendor renegotiation.
Bi-weekly advisory calls. Monthly independent project health report. Review of all material change orders.
Standard plus: weekly AI-assisted monitoring of all project documentation, steering committee attendance as independent advisor, same-day response to urgent decisions, board-ready monthly summary.
Enhanced plus: embedded presence at all critical milestones, direct board access, co-development of escalation strategy. For the highest-risk, highest-value engagements.
Develop the messaging and communication assets that build internal support for the project. Internal project marketing strategy, communication plan across all levels, messaging that acknowledges difficulty without undermining confidence, success definition frameworks, and concession and idea tracking systems.
The implementation partner leaves. The system is live. A gap opens almost immediately between what was promised and what was delivered. This stream closes that gap and builds the foundation for ongoing value.
Honest gap analysis between expected and actual performance. Adoption failure identification. Data quality audit. Prioritised remediation plan. Roadmap for unlocking AI and analytics value.
Role-by-role analysis against ERP task dependency and automation probability at three time horizons: 12, 24, and 36 months. Identification of high-value people — costly to lose, worth developing deliberately. Practical transition plan. Board-ready deliverable.
Comprehensive review of current data architecture and AI readiness. If AI readiness is a stated goal, data readiness is a prerequisite. Evaluates the best strategy for modernizing the data estate. Most valuable after go-live when the actual state of the data is known, but can also be engaged during active implementation.
Ongoing advisory after go-live. Monthly cadence. Focus on adoption, process optimisation, feature evaluation, and building the ERP foundation that AI investment requires.
Your ERP will live within a world of AI. The quality of the ERP implementation — the data structures, customisation decisions, integration architecture — determines what AI can and cannot do. As our primary focus is your ERP and the world it lives in, our AI-related services are typically embedded in ERP project work, not sold independently.
Assessment of the ERP implementation’s readiness to support AI and analytics investment. Data quality scoring, integration architecture review, customisation assessment against AI survivability criteria, headless ERP readiness. Separates what is genuinely AI-ready from what vendors are claiming is.
Review of a proposed AI investment scored against the organisation’s actual ERP data foundations. Separates genuine value from Toxic Confidence. Delivers a proceed / pilot / pause recommendation.
Every backlog item scored against: Will this process survive AI? Does it clean or contaminate the data? What does it cost to maintain through upgrades?
Expert Help, For What You Need, When You Need It.
We use cookies to analyze website traffic and optimize your website experience. By accepting our use of cookies, your data will be aggregated with all other user data.