A ranked backlog
Every candidate scored on value, data readiness and risk, so the funding argument is already made before a sprint is booked.
A costed roadmap that says which AI ideas to fund, which to shelve, and what each one is worth.
Most AI programmes stall because the first project was chosen in a meeting rather than measured against the work. We start with the work. We sit with the people who clear the queue, watch what they actually do, and count the hours it takes them.
Every candidate use case is then scored on three axes: the value it releases, the readiness of the data behind it, and the risk it carries when the model is wrong. Some ideas survive that. Most do not, and saying so in week two is the point of the exercise.
You finish with a ranked backlog, a cost model per use case that includes inference and maintenance rather than build alone, and a build-versus-buy call on each. Where the honest answer is that a rules engine beats a model, the report says that.
Every candidate scored on value, data readiness and risk, so the funding argument is already made before a sprint is booked.
Engineering, inference, monitoring and the human review that stays in the loop, priced per workflow instead of as one programme number.
Where a product on the market wins, we say so. Where it cannot reach your data or locks you in, we show what building instead costs over three years.
Data handling, model access, approval gates and audit expectations written down while they are still cheap to change.
Two days with the teams doing the work. We record how a task actually moves, where it queues, what people do when the system says no, and which spreadsheet holds the truth.
Each candidate is traced back to the systems that hold its data. We test whether we can reach it, and note what is missing, stale, duplicated or typed in by hand every morning.
Value comes from observed volumes and handling times, not from a vendor benchmark. Risk gets a class. Inference is priced at the token volumes your real traffic would produce.
Sequenced so the first build funds the second. We present it to your leadership, take the argument, and revise until the plan survives the room.
Each phase ends with something you can read and act on. If the evidence says stop, stopping there is a supported outcome rather than an awkward conversation.
Tooling is a decision we make per project, against your constraints and whatever your team already runs. Nothing on this list is a requirement, and we will work inside your existing stack where it holds up.
Often the recommendation is to buy, or to fix a process before automating it. The roadmap is written to stand alone — clients have taken it to a different delivery partner and it still works.
The scorecard and the cost model land at the end of the sprint, one to two weeks in. Nothing is held back for a paid second phase.
Yes. A focused assessment scores your shortlist on the same three axes. It usually adds one candidate nobody had listed, because it came from the operators rather than the strategy session.
Tell us where the work sits today and what is holding it up. We will come back with the shape of a first phase, what it would prove, and what running it takes.
+91 97915 97993