Every service we offer exists because clients kept calling us with the same situations. Here's what we solve—with the rare combination of financial rigour and technical execution that doesn't exist elsewhere.
The technology team is rudderless. The board is nervous. You need someone who can take the seat immediately and stabilise the ship.
Mykola takes the technology leadership seat personally—full P&L accountability, board reporting, daily operational leadership. This isn't advisory. It's executive accountability. He brings rapid access to our curated network: technical specialists, security experts, CFO-level financial advisors, commercial lawyers, and procurement experts. Complete leadership with the capacity to execute at scale.
Most interim CTOs are technologists. They'll stabilise the engineering team but won't challenge the cost base. They don't speak finance. They don't restructure P&Ls. We do both—because the board doesn't just need technology leadership, they need technology leadership that pays for itself.
Our engagement framework is structured to stabilise and transform your technology function:
The CFO is under pressure. The IT leadership is defensive. You need someone who can read both the financial statements and the technical systems.
Top-down percentage mandates don't work. They lead to across-the-board cuts that damage capability. Our methodology employs comprehensive bottom-up forensic analysis—we examine every invoice, software licence, and contractual line item. This approach typically identifies 25-30% of software expenditure as unutilised licences that can be eliminated without impact.
Your CFO can analyse the numbers but can't evaluate whether the "essential" £800k system is actually essential. Your IT leadership knows the technology but has every incentive to protect the budget. You need someone who speaks both languages—and has no political stake in the outcome.
We know what "good" looks like. We've seen the cost structures of dozens of technology organisations. We reconstruct budgets from first principles—every expenditure must demonstrate business value. We handle the vendor negotiations directly, applying market intelligence across cloud providers, enterprise software vendors, and software subscriptions.
The technology team says it's necessary. Finance says it's out of control. You need someone who understands both.
Simply moving systems to the cloud often increases costs—you're paying premium rates for infrastructure that wasn't designed for the cloud. We've seen this pattern repeatedly. The fix requires proper modernisation: restructuring systems to ensure you only pay for what you actually use.
Cloud vendors and their partners are incentivised to maximise your spend, not minimise it. Your technology team sees cloud as modernisation, not cost management. We see both—and we negotiate cloud contracts with the leverage of knowing exactly what you need and what you don't.
For organisations still running their own data centres, we use proven migration methodologies—moving systems incrementally with zero disruption to operations. We've led migrations for the UK's largest cloud deployments. We know what can go wrong, and how to prevent it.
Whether it's cost in London or talent scarcity in the region—your roadmap is blocked by a lack of elite engineers. You need immediate capacity.
We've built and transferred engineering teams for global PLCs. We establish dedicated centres in high-density talent hubs—Poland, Portugal, Romania. This isn't just about cost—it's about accessing a pool of computer science talent that is either unavailable or prohibitively expensive in your local market. We handle recruitment, HR, and management, then transfer the asset to you.
Outsourcing vendors bill hours and create dependency—they're incentivised to make you need them forever. Our BOT model transfers the team to you. It's an asset you own, not a cost that never ends. That's the difference between renting and building.
You don't need "cheaper resources"—you need "better engineers." Our model solves the quality and culture gap:
The last agency delivered something unmaintainable. Or over budget. Or both. You need product delivery with actual accountability.
Every week you don't ship is lost market share. We don't get stuck in "discovery hell." We build complete digital products with integrated teams—design, engineering, and growth—focused on one metric: Time to Value. Whether it's a customer-facing app or a complex B2B platform, we own the outcome end-to-end.
Most agencies bill by the hour and have no stake in the outcome. Scope creep? More hours. Timeline extends? More hours. We structure engagements around delivery milestones with fixed outcomes—because we understand that every week of delay has a real cost to your business.
We build systems that scale with your business from day one:
The target's technology looks shakier than the management team claimed. You need someone who can tell you what's real, what's fixable, and what it will cost.
Our due diligence goes deeper than technical quality. We evaluate the full technology organisation:
Technical reviewers tell you if the systems are good. They don't tell you what it costs to fix, whether the team can execute, or how to structure the earn-out. We translate technical risk into financial terms—because that's what affects your IRR.
We don't just identify risks—we quantify them. Our reports provide specific cost estimates for remediation, realistic timelines for transformation, and clear recommendations on deal structure adjustments. We've supported transactions ranging from £10M to £500M+.
Flexible structures designed around your needs, not ours.
Mykola takes the technology leadership seat full-time, typically for 6-18 month transformations. Complete budget accountability, board reporting, and team leadership. Ideal for turnarounds, restructurings, or major changes.
Typical duration: 6-18 months
2-3 days per week of executive leadership for organisations that need senior technology guidance but not a full-time hire. Strategy setting, team development, vendor management, and board-level reporting.
Typical duration: 6-12 months
Strategic advisory for boards, investors, and executives. Technology assessments, strategy reviews, and expert analysis. High-impact interventions without operational involvement.
Typical duration: Project-based
Days 0-30: Comprehensive assessment of risks, dependencies, and quick wins. Immediate stabilisation of at-risk projects.
Days 30-60: New operating structure defined. Organisational changes. Vendor renegotiations initiated.
Days 60-90: Full-speed plan execution. New programmes launched. Measurable progress to board.
If any of these scenarios feel familiar,
let's have a conversation.
No pitch—just a direct discussion about what's possible.