Skip to content

Work With Me

Engineering Effectiveness Review

Nothing is on fire and everything takes longer than it should. This engagement names the constraint, and stops you spending another quarter optimising around it.

Who it is for Engineering organisations of 20 to 100 where delivery is slower than it should be

what usually brings people here

Delivery is slower than it should be and nobody can agree on why. Nothing is on fire. Estimates are honest and dates still slip. Hiring has not helped and neither has the last reorganisation. Every function has a theory and each theory is partly right, which is why the argument never resolves. What this looks at is the delivery system itself: where work waits, who hands off to whom, what depends on what, who owns a release, and which numbers are worth reading.

  • Delivery dates move for reasons that are obvious afterwards and invisible before.
  • Every team reports being blocked by a different team.
  • The metrics you have measure activity, so they go up while delivery does not.
  • Adding engineers has stopped changing the throughput.

what I do about it

  1. Map the path to production

    One change, followed end to end, with the waiting time between each step made visible. Waiting is almost always the majority of it.

  2. Interviews at the seams

    The handovers between teams, between product and engineering, and between building and running. The seams are where the time goes.

  3. A metric set worth having

    A small set your leadership can act on, built from data you already produce, not from a survey nobody will run twice.

  4. A findings workshop

    Your leaders in one room with the map, ranking the constraints themselves. A conclusion a team argues its way to is one the team implements.

what you leave with

  • A mapped delivery path with the waiting time named and measured.
  • The constraints ranked, and the interventions sequenced against them.
  • A metric set your leadership can act on, with the review cadence to keep it honest.
  • A shared account of what is slow, agreed in the room rather than announced afterwards.

format, timing and price

Format
3 weeks. Delivery data, interviews, and a workshop on the findings.
Outcome
Mapped constraints, a metric set your leadership can act on, and a sequenced intervention plan.
Price
from €7,500

Fixed scope and fixed price once we agree the scope on the diagnostic call. Remote, with the findings workshop on site where that is practical.

Free. No pitch. You'll leave with at least one named bottleneck.

questions people ask about this engagement

How is this different from the AI Readiness Assessment?

Same method, different question. The Review asks why delivery is slow. The Assessment asks that question with AI spend in the frame, and adds a review of how changes get made and a thesis on the return. If AI is not the reason you are asking, this is the one you want.

Will this turn into a reorganisation?

Rarely, and never as the first move. Reorganisations are expensive, slow to show a result, and easy to reach for when the actual constraint is a queue nobody owns.

Does the team have to stop shipping?

No. The cost to the team is interview time and read access. There is no audit week and no freeze.

What size of team is this for?

Roughly 20 to 100 engineers. Below that the constraint is usually visible without me; above that a single review starts to average away the thing you needed to see.

Not sure which problem you have? That's usually the first finding.

Free. No pitch. You'll leave with at least one named bottleneck.