Assessments & Advisory
Understand the position
before committing
to the solution.
UncertaintyA decision you can defend
Sometimes the right next step is not an implementation. It is establishing what is true. An assessment starts from the decision leadership needs to make, gathers evidence proportionate to that decision, separates what is confirmed from what is still assumed, and sets out the credible options.
Before deciding what to change, establish what is true.
In short
A recommendation is only as useful as the evidence underneath it.
The purpose is not a longer report. It is an easier decision, and a cheaper mistake avoided.
- Start with the decision, not the solution.
- Not every situation needs a structured assessment.
- Where uncertainty is material, define a bounded piece of work.
- Gather evidence proportionate to the question.
- Separate fact, interpretation and recommendation.
- Do not force a conclusion the evidence cannot support.
- Compare credible options, including doing nothing.
- Route to Retain, Optimise, Recover, Transform or Implement, RAPID qualification, a specialist action, further evidence or no action.
- Any follow-on project is a separate decision.
Qualify or assess
Not every opportunity needs an assessment.
An assessment is appropriate when the uncertainty is significant enough that committing without further evidence would be irresponsible. It is not a tollgate we place in front of delivery.
Qualification
Enough understanding to decide whether there is a responsible route to progress. Part of a normal conversation, not a separate engagement.
Structured assessment
A discrete, evidence-led advisory engagement, used where material uncertainty means committing without further evidence would be irresponsible.
Specialist review
A bounded review owned by the relevant discipline: support, licensing, data, integration, adoption or security.
No assessment required
The question can be answered from what is already known, or the uncertainty does not change the decision.
- We do not trust the reported project position.
- We think the ERP is underperforming, but not why.
- We are not sure whether to keep, improve or change the platform.
- We do not know whether Business Central or Finance & Supply Chain fits.
- Our operation depends on workarounds we cannot explain.
- Our reporting is disputed at management level.
- We may be paying for Microsoft capability we do not need.
- We want AI but cannot say where it would create value.
- We are considering changing Microsoft partner.
- We need evidence for a board decision.
Start with the decision
Four questions leaders usually arrive with.
These are orientation questions rather than product names. The right assessment, if any, follows from the decision rather than from a catalogue.
Can we trust our current position?
Used where the reported status, the delivery position or the service position is no longer believed, and leadership needs an independent read of the evidence.
Possible routes
- Project health and delivery assurance
- Recovery position
- Support health
- Support takeover readiness
Should we keep, improve or change the platform?
Two separate questions that are often merged: is the platform healthy, and does the platform fit the operating complexity? Health is usually answered first.
Possible routes
- ERP health
- ERP platform fit
- CRM assessment
Where is operational value being lost?
Used where the platform is live and broadly accepted, but effort, delay or rework is concentrated in specific processes.
Possible routes
- Optimisation review
- Process review
- Warehouse or manufacturing review
- Data quality review
Are we ready for the next investment?
Used before committing to reporting, commercial or AI investment, where readiness rather than ambition is the constraint.
Possible routes
- Reporting and Fabric readiness
- Licensing and commercial architecture
- AI opportunity
- Predictive readiness
How an assessment works
The purpose is not a longer report. It is an easier decision.
Each stage exists to remove a specific kind of uncertainty. If a stage would not change the recommendation, it does not need to happen.
Frame the question
The decision leadership actually needs to make.
Bound the scope
Included, excluded, assumed and depended upon.
Plan the evidence
Proportional to the question, not to the invoice.
Gather and test
Including the assumptions everybody has stopped questioning.
Establish findings
What the evidence supports, and what it does not.
Assess impact
Business consequence, not technical severity alone.
Define options
Including the option to change nothing.
Recommend
With the reasoning and the limitations visible.
Prioritise
Act now, next, plan, monitor, no action.
Decide
The organisation decides. We make that easier.
Frame the question
Start with the decision leadership is trying to make.
A clear question keeps the assessment focused and keeps the cost proportionate.
- Should we recover the current programme, or re-plan it?
- Is Business Central still the right platform for how we now operate?
- Can the current implementation reach go-live safely?
- Why is warehouse performance below expectation?
- Is Microsoft Fabric justified, or is Power BI sufficient?
- Is the CRM supporting the commercial process, or recording it afterwards?
- Where is project margin being lost?
- Which AI use cases, if any, are worth pursuing now?
- Is our licensing position defensible against current Microsoft terms?
Scope, assumptions and exclusions
A bounded assessment produces a more defensible conclusion.
An undefined review of everything produces a long document and a slower decision. What is excluded matters as much as what is included.
- Systems and environments
- Processes and value streams
- Legal entities and sites
- Evidence sources
- Stakeholder groups
Look before concluding
Evidence proportional to the question, with its source recorded.
We would rather examine the right five sources than list twenty and read none of them properly. The evidence behind a finding should be traceable, not simply summarised.
- Configuration and extensions
- Transactions, volumes and usage
- Logs and performance data
- Security roles and access
- Integration behaviour
Evidence register
Provenance and currency, kept proportionate.
Evidence goes stale. A design document from two years ago describes an intention, not the current live state.
- Evidence reference
- Source and source type
- Source date
- Evidence owner
- The question it addresses
- Known limitation
- Completeness status
- The findings it supports
Evidence sufficiency
Not enough evidence to conclude is a defensible outcome.
Every material statement carries a status. We do not convert uncertainty into a numerical confidence score, because that implies a precision the evidence does not have.
Observed or confirmed
Seen directly in the system, the data or the operation.
Supported with limitations
The evidence points one way, and the limitation is stated.
Incomplete
Part of the required evidence exists. The gap is named.
Conflicting
Sources disagree, and the disagreement is shown rather than resolved silently.
Assumption
Relied upon but not yet evidenced, and flagged as such.
Further evidence required
The question can be answered, but not yet.
Unable to conclude
The evidence available cannot support a defensible answer.
Current state
Separate the operating problem from the technology symptom.
The same complaint can have several contributing causes. The purpose of assessment is to identify which interventions are justified by the evidence.
Business
Which outcome is being affected, and by how much?
Process
Where does work actually break down?
People
Where is ownership unclear or contested?
Platform
What is configured, designed or extended poorly?
Data
What cannot currently be trusted?
Integration
Where do handoffs between systems fail?
Control and risk
Where has control drifted, and what does that expose?
Commercial
What is the financial consequence of all of it?
Assessment replaces assumptions with hypotheses that can be tested.
None of these are translations. The initial explanation may still be correct. The point is that it is a hypothesis until the evidence supports it, and more than one cause can be true at once.
Initial explanation
Users need more training.
Possible causes to test
- Process design
- Usability
- System configuration
- Data quality
- Performance
- Knowledge and training
- Leadership and process ownership
Initial explanation
Power BI is wrong.
Possible causes to test
- Source data
- KPI definition
- Transformation logic
- Semantic model
- Report logic
- Filtering and row-level security
Initial explanation
We need a new ERP.
Possible causes to test
- Process fit
- Configuration
- Customisation and technical debt
- Data quality
- Adoption
- Genuine platform capability limits
Initial explanation
The warehouse needs more people.
Possible causes to test
- Layout and slotting
- Replenishment and work planning
- Inventory accuracy
- Device and system usage on the floor
- Demand pattern and shift structure
Initial explanation
AI will solve the reporting issue.
Possible causes to test
- Agreed KPI definitions
- Data availability and quality
- Whether reporting alone would answer it
- Whether deterministic automation is safer
- Human accountability for the output
Findings
Every finding should survive being questioned.
A finding without evidence is an opinion. A finding without business impact is trivia. Interpretation is shown as interpretation, never as evidence.
Evidence
What was observed, where, and when.
Finding
What the evidence establishes, stated in one sentence.
Interpretation
What it may mean, separated from what is established.
Business consequence
Cost, risk, delay, control or customer consequence.
Options
Credible responses, including doing nothing.
Recommendation
What we advise, and why.
Open assumptions
What remains uncertain, and what would resolve it.
Priority
An assessment should be allowed to conclude: do nothing.
We prioritise with reasoning rather than colour coding. Red, amber and green with no explanation moves a problem into a spreadsheet rather than into a decision.
Act now
Material risk or an immediate dependency.
Next
An important improvement or decision.
Plan
Worth addressing, but not immediately.
Monitor
Evidence does not yet justify intervention.
No action
The current approach remains reasonable.
Confidence gates
An assessment should only become more certain where the evidence justifies it.
Four points where continuing has to be re-earned. Each can legitimately conclude that we cannot yet answer the question.
Gate 1
Question and scope
The question is worth answering, and the scope can answer it.
Confirmed before delivery begins. Most disappointing assessments were scoped before the decision was understood.
Confirmed at this gate
- The decision leadership needs to make, and its owner
- Scope: processes, systems, entities and stakeholders
- Evidence required and access required
- Output required, assumptions and exclusions
Decision
Proceed as scoped · Narrow the scope to the decision · Reframe the question · Another route is more appropriate
Gate 2
Evidence
The evidence is sufficient to reason from.
Confirmed before any material conclusion is drawn, not after the report has been drafted.
Confirmed at this gate
- Evidence is relevant and current enough for the question
- Material sources have been reviewed, not just listed
- Conflicting evidence is visible rather than smoothed over
- Known gaps are explicit, and stakeholder assumptions have been tested where possible
Decision
Proceed to findings · Gather more evidence · State that we cannot conclude yet
Gate 3
Finding and recommendation
The recommendation survives being challenged.
An assessment should only become more certain where the evidence justifies it.
Confirmed at this gate
- Each finding follows from its evidence
- Alternative explanations were considered and tested
- Business impact and dependencies are understood
- Assumptions are visible and the options are credible
Decision
Recommend · Revise the finding · Remain inconclusive and say so
Gate 4
Decision readiness
Leadership can actually make the decision.
Confirmed before closure. The test is whether the decision owner could act on the output alone.
Confirmed at this gate
- The executive question has been answered, or the reason it cannot be is stated
- Options and trade-offs are visible
- Commercial implications are understood at the appropriate level
- Unresolved decisions are explicit and immediate actions have owners
Decision
Retain, Optimise, Recover, Transform or Implement · RAPID qualification, or a specialist route · Further evidence, or no action
Draft findings and factual challenge
Customers should be able to challenge a finding.
They should not need to agree with it for evidence-supported conclusions to remain visible. Factual review corrects facts. It does not remove inconvenient evidence.
Draft finding
Issued with its evidence attached, not as a conclusion to accept.
Customer factual review
The organisation checks the facts we have relied on.
Evidence challenge
Anything disputed is traced back to its source.
Correct facts
Where we are wrong, the finding changes.
Resolve conflicts
Where sources disagree, the disagreement is recorded.
Final finding
Evidence-supported conclusions remain visible, agreed or not.
Options
A credible assessment shows the choices, not only the preferred answer.
If only one route is presented, the organisation cannot really be said to have decided anything.
Retain, no change
The current position remains reasonable, and the reason is recorded.
Optimise
The platform remains fundamentally appropriate but can create more value.
Recover
Stability or confidence needs restoring before anything else is planned.
Transform or Implement
Material operating or platform change is justified. Platform replacement, where evidenced, sits inside this route.
RAPID qualification
The requirement may warrant evaluation against strict-fit accelerated criteria. Qualification still happens separately.
Specialist action
Support, adoption, data, licensing, integration or security owns the next step.
Further evidence
More investigation is required before any route can be recommended.
No action
Nothing the evidence shows justifies intervention at this point.
- Benefit
- Risk
- Cost implication
- Dependency
- Time consideration
- Business disruption
- Strategic fit
- We do not invent financial figures without customer evidence
An assessment can provide evidence that supports RAPID qualification. It does not replace RAPID qualification.
Executive decision pack
Written to be useful beyond IT.
The output should let an executive who missed every workshop understand the evidence, the options and the decision required.
- Executive question
- Scope, assumptions and exclusions
- Evidence basis and limitations
- Material findings
- Business consequences and risks
- Options and trade-offs
- Recommendation and priority
- Immediate actions with owners
- Open decisions and proposed route
- Supporting evidence appendix
- Not every assessment requires every artefact
Shared responsibility
We can assess the evidence available.
We cannot manufacture evidence the organisation does not have. Access, availability and factual validation determine what an assessment can honestly conclude.
- Assessment framing and evidence plan
- Interviews, workshops and observation where in scope
- System and process review
- Analysis, findings and options
- Recommendation and executive output
Independence of the decision
Any follow-on work is a separate decision.
The assessment should remain useful even if InteliSense is not selected to deliver the recommendation.
Follow-on work is a separate decision
The assessment should remain useful even if InteliSense is not selected to deliver the recommendation.
Findings do not create project scope
A finding is evidence about the current position, not an approved piece of work.
Recommendation is not commercial approval
Any implementation scope still has to be qualified and agreed on its own terms.
The recommendation is yours
You may take it to your incumbent partner, to the market, or nowhere at all.
Access and confidentiality
Assessment access should be proportionate to the question.
An assessment can reach sensitive configuration, data and commercial information. Access is scoped to what the question needs, and removed when it ends.
- System configuration and privileged access
- Customer and employee data
- Open project issues
- Commercial position, budgets and contracts
- Licence position and supplier disputes
Validity
An assessment is evidence-based and time-bound, not permanently true.
Conclusions are anchored to a date and a set of assumptions. What matters is knowing when they should be revisited.
- Assessment date
- Evidence cut-off date
- Assumptions relied upon
- Unresolved questions
- The trigger that should cause a review
Assessment detail
What each area actually examines.
The depth sits here rather than in the executive layer. The full commercial position for each discipline lives on its specialist page.
Specialist decision areas
Related, but not naturally one assessment.
Data, commercial and AI questions interact. They still have separate evidence, separate sources and separate decisions, so they are scoped separately.
- Whether the numbers can be trusted, and who owns them
- KPI definitions and disputed measures
- Reporting architecture and manual reporting still produced outside the platform
- Whether Power BI is sufficient, or Microsoft Fabric is genuinely justified
Honest by default
An assessment that always recommends a project is not an assessment.
We publish customer evidence in the customer's own words. Our published customer evidence reflects delivery and support experience. It is not offered as proof of assessment accuracy or of any particular assessment outcome.
- How the diagnostic process works
- The gates, the statuses and the output structure
- Available today, and described on this page
Assessment router
Where would an assessment conversation start for you?
Five questions, kept at organisational level. The result is a likely starting point rather than a diagnosis, and one of the possible answers is that no assessment is required.
Indicative signal
Answer the questions and we will show a likely starting point. This is orientation rather than a diagnosis, and one of the possible answers is that no assessment is required. Please keep every answer at organisational level.
Your answers are carried through, so you will not be asked to repeat them. Final qualification is always a conversation.
Common questions
Questions leaders ask before commissioning an assessment.
Start with the question
Know something is wrong, but not yet what to do about it?
Tell us the decision you are trying to make. We will give an honest view on whether an assessment would help, what it would examine, what you would receive, and what it would cost.