When engineering is the bottleneck, everything stalls
The roadmap keeps slipping and no one can say why with authority.
Architecture decisions are made by whoever is loudest — technical debt is compounding.
A non-technical founder can't evaluate their own engineers, vendors, or estimates.
The team has no one to escalate to, no standards, and no plan they believe in.
Investors or the board want a credible technical story the founder can't yet tell.
What you get
Not hours on a timesheet — decisions made, systems shipped, and a program that works.
Strategy in writing
A 12-month technical strategy tied to business milestones — durable, reviewable, shareable with the board.
Architecture calls made
Build-vs-buy, platform choices, and scalability decisions made by someone who has made them before.
A team that ships
Engineering standards, review cadence, hiring bar, and a roadmap the team actually believes in.
Board-ready narrative
The technical slides and talking points so investors understand the plan — not just the features.
Three shapes, one operator
Start where the pain is acute. Scale as trust is established.
Your first 90 days
A predictable ramp with clear deliverables at each phase.
Weeks 1–2 — Assess
Codebase, architecture, team, roadmap, and tooling review. Deliver the Technical Assessment: top risks + sequenced plan.
Weeks 3–4 — Stabilize
Fix the highest-severity delivery blocker and install the review/release cadence.
Weeks 5–8 — Direction
Publish the 12-month technical strategy and target architecture. Align the board narrative.
Weeks 9–12 — Build the machine
Hiring plan in motion, standards adopted, roadmap shipping on cadence. Decide: continue Embedded or step up to Fractional-in-a-box.
Not the right fit?
We are selective about engagements. This may not be right if:
✗
Pre-product with no engineers yet — you need a builder, not a leader.
✗
Wants 40 hours/week of hands-on coding (that's a senior contractor; we'll refer you).
✗
Needs someone available on-demand by phone all day — our model is async by design.