Three-week Architecture Review Initiative
As-is documentation, gap analysis against stated business objectives, and a prioritized target-state roadmap. Output is a single document the next CIO interview, next board meeting, or next investment review can consume.
Who this is for
A defensible read on whether your current architecture supports where the business is going.
CIO / CTO
You inherited an architecture and want an outside read before committing to a multi-year roadmap.
CEO
You are about to make a major technology investment and want a third-party check on the architecture context.
COO
Operational scaling is being constrained by something in the stack and you need it diagnosed.
Board
You want clarity on whether technology can support the strategic plan, in business terms.
Scope
What this initiative delivers, and what it does not.
Scope is fixed at signing. Items tagged TOP are available inside the broader Technology Operating Partner retainer; the initiative alone does not include them. Items tagged with an outside source require a separate specialty engagement.
In scope
- As-is architecture documented from existing diagrams, system inventories, and interviews
- Business-alignment review: where architecture supports stated objectives, where it constrains them
- Gap analysis across scalability, integration, technical debt, vendor concentration, and key-person dependency
- Target-state recommendation at the architectural-pattern level
- Investment roadmap prioritized by business impact and dependency
- Reference to recognized architecture frameworks at the appropriate layer (TOGAF for enterprise architecture; AWS Well-Architected and Azure Well-Architected for cloud workload patterns) where applicable
Out of scope
- Detailed system or component-level redesignEngineering firm
- Vendor selection or RFP execution for target-state componentsTOP
- Implementation of any roadmap itemTOP
- Code-level review or refactoring guidanceEngineering firm
- Network or infrastructure engineering deliverablesEngineering firm
Inputs
What we need from you
Provided at kickoff. Missing inputs delay the initiative; they do not change scope.
- Existing architecture diagrams, system inventories, or integration maps (we reconstruct if absent; reconstruction adds time)
- Stated business objectives or strategic plan (formal or informal is fine)
- Three to five interviews (CIO or CTO, engineering lead, business unit lead, optionally CFO and CEO)
Timeline
Week by week
Daily visibility throughout. Mid-initiative check confirms direction before the deliverable lands.
Week 1
As-is documentation and intake
Existing diagrams reviewed or reconstructed; system inventory finalized. Document intake and access setup.
Week 2
Interviews and gap analysis
Three to five interviews to validate as-is and surface friction. Scalability, integration, debt, vendor concentration, and key-person mapping.
Week 3
Target-state, roadmap, walkthrough
Architectural-pattern recommendation, prioritized investment roadmap. Mid-Initiative check with CIO. Final brief and roadmap delivered with walkthrough.
Output
What you walk away with
- Written architecture brief (as-is + gap analysis + target-state)
- Prioritized investment roadmap with effort and dependency markers
- Walkthrough call with CIO and one business stakeholder
Honest framing
What this initiative is not
This Initiative produces an architectural-pattern recommendation, not a detailed system design. Vendor selection, RFP execution, and implementation work are outside the Initiative window. The roadmap is sequenced by business impact and known dependencies; sequencing should be revalidated when execution is committed.
If you are a portfolio company
How the work calibrates to the PE-backed seat.
Companies inside a PE portfolio operate against constraints generalist enterprise framing does not cover. Each of these shapes how the Initiative is scoped and sequenced.
- Board reporting cycle. Output is sized to land before the next quarterly board read, not the company's annual planning calendar.
- Exit window math. Decisions made 12 to 24 months ahead of exit show up at the bid. Where applicable, findings are tagged for the exit-window timeline they affect.
- Add-on integration tempo. Findings that pertain to acquisition integrations are surfaced separately so the deal team can either price them in or sequence the integration around them.
- Cost discipline by hold position. Recommendations are calibrated to where the portco sits in the hold cycle. A company in early hold has different cost flex than one 12 months from exit.
Related
Initiatives that pair with this one
FAQ
Questions buyers ask first
How long does an enterprise architecture assessment take?
A minimum viable current-state assessment lands in 30 to 60 days. A full four-domain roadmap covering business, data, applications, and technology takes three to six months. Preside runs the 30-day version as the standard entry point because the value compounds. Once the current-state map exists, every vendor decision, every architecture review, and every board discussion has the same reference document.
Should we start with current state or target state architecture?
Current state, every time. A target-state diagram drawn without a current-state baseline is a wishlist. It cannot be sequenced, costed, or defended. The current-state assessment surfaces the dependencies that determine which target-state moves are real this year and which take three. Preside delivers current state first, then layers the target state and the transition architecture on top.
For your role
Where this initiative fits into the wider Preside view
For CEOs →
The current-state baseline that turns "we need to rebuild everything" into a sequenced plan with named decisions.
For CFOs →
What architecture debt costs in dollars and how that figure moves over a three-year horizon.
For CIOs and Heads of IT →
How the four-domain TOGAF view becomes the running reference document for every vendor and platform decision.
Inside the broader program
When the initiative becomes the standing engagement
This Initiative is a one-time fixed-price engagement. The Technology Operating Partner relationship continues the work on a quarterly cadence at one of four Program tiers: the dashboard gets re-run, the savings get re-baselined, the architecture gets re-mapped, and the board gets the same format every meeting. Most clients begin with an Initiative like this one and decide on the tier after the deliverable lands.
Ready to scope this
From inherited stack to a target-state roadmap in business terms. Three weeks.
One email. Brief description of the situation. We respond within one business day with initiative confirmation or a recommendation of a better fit.
Not sure this is the right initiative for your situation? Take the four-question path-finder for a personalized recommendation.