Consulting · contracting · platform architecture
Bring me in when the AWS estate technically works, but operationally nobody trusts it.
I help teams clean up platform sprawl, put guardrails in the right layer, modernise awkward workloads, and cut through the process theatre that slows delivery down.
Proof surface
Useful because the work changes operating behaviour, not just diagrams.
Publicly safe examples of the kinds of outcomes I have delivered.
Most governance problems are operating-model problems wearing a policy costume. The fix is usually clearer boundaries, better escalation paths, and controls in the right layer.
Not dashboard theatre. Runtime shape, scheduling, ownership, and defaults matter more.
Useful when “it works” really means “it burns money slowly and fails awkwardly.”
Reliability work counts when the user-visible problem actually disappears.
What I usually help with
Three recurring problem shapes
Fix where SCPs, detective controls, exceptions, ownership, and reporting have drifted apart.
Untangle platform, security, and delivery boundaries so the platform becomes easier to trust and easier to use.
Rework runtime and lifecycle choices that create cost drag, scaling pain, and fragile operations.
Find the operating constraint first
I am usually most useful when a team already has dashboards, tickets, policies, and committees, but still cannot explain who owns the real boundary or why the platform behaves the way it does.
No appetite for architecture cosplay
If the goal is to produce a shiny target-state deck with no implementation path, I am the wrong person.
Engagement shapes
Different entry points. Same bias toward practical change.
Assessment and direction
Fast review of platform governance, workload shape, or cost discipline with a blunt set of findings and a practical sequence of fixes.
Contracting / implementation
Come in and build the missing pieces: guardrails, reporting, workload boundaries, delivery automation, or the migration plumbing nobody wants to own.
Architect who still ships
Useful when a team needs architecture decisions grounded in actual platform delivery rather than slideware or committee output.
Strong fit
Where I tend to add value fastest
- AWS estates with governance debt and ownership blur
- Teams stuck between architecture intent and operational reality
- Modernisation work where runtime shape matters as much as code
- Cost problems caused by platform design, not just spend visibility
- Environments that need practical leadership without management fluff
Weak fit
Where I am probably the wrong hire
- Pure strategy work with no implementation path
- Teams looking for a generic cloud cert consultant
- Long discovery projects that avoid hard technical decisions
- Places that want architecture documents more than platform change
How to start
The first useful conversation is simple.
- Tell me what is messy.
- Tell me what is politically sensitive.
- Tell me what is costing time or money.
- I will tell you where the real problem probably is.