SerSan · Technical Audits & Architecture
Technical Audits & ArchitectureFind what should not be built, before code becomes debt.
A short, senior review of what you have and what you're about to build: what to build, what to buy, what to leave alone. You leave with a written recommendation you can act on, with us or without us.
2–6 business days · fixed scope
What goes wrong before the build
Most of the money lost on software is spent building the wrong thing, well.
Projects rarely fail at execution. They fail at the decision before it: the wrong tool was bought, the integration plan was optimistic, the data wasn't where everyone assumed, or the thing being automated wasn't the expensive part. Two months in, the team is committed to a path that should have been stopped in scoping. A few days of senior review beforehand is the cheapest work in the whole project.
Typical build includes
What the review actually hands you.
A focused diagnostic uses fewer of these than a full audit. Scope, questions and depth are agreed before day one, so the review ends on the day it said it would.
- 01
Two scopes: focused diagnostic or full audit
A focused diagnostic looks at one workflow, product problem, automation opportunity or system. A full technical audit looks at the broader architecture, workflows, data, tooling and delivery environment. Same method, different surface — you pick the scope before we start.
- 02
Build vs. buy vs. don't-build recommendation
For each piece of the proposed system: ship it, license it, or kill it. With reasoning, costs, and a sequencing plan.
- 03
Reference architecture + sequencing plan
If the recommendation is 'build', the architecture comes with it. Component-level breakdown, data flow, failure modes, deployment order, and the minimum viable first phase.
- 04
Risk register: technical and regulatory
Documented risks with severity, likelihood and mitigation. Where regulation applies — EU AI Act, DORA, sector rules — the posture is stated explicitly, not waved at. Where it doesn't, we don't invent overhead.
- 05
Optional follow-on build engagement
If you decide to build, we can. The audit fee credits against the build engagement. If you'd rather build it elsewhere, the recommendation is written to be handed over.
Where this lands
Four decisions where a short review pays for itself.
01 · Use case
Before you commit to building
You're about to spend real money and real months on a build. We do the architecture and the honest arithmetic first, and tell you which parts are worth it.
02 · Use case
You're not sure where AI would help
You know something should improve but not what to build. We look at the workflows, name the opportunities that pay back, and say plainly where AI is the wrong answer and ordinary software is better.
03 · Use case
Software you inherited or didn't build
You took over a system you didn't design, or you need an honest readiness check before a board meeting, a customer commitment or an audit. We tell you what you actually have, what's at risk, and what to do first.
04 · Use case
Choosing a vendor or a platform
You're evaluating tools or suppliers and every demo looks the same. We give you the technical questions to ask, and we score the answers.
Deliverables
What you actually hold at the end.
Concrete artefacts, handed over at the end. A written recommendation, the diagrams and the risk register behind it — yours to act on, with us or with anyone else.
- Written recommendation, sized to scope, never a deck
- Risk register with severities + mitigation
- Build vs. buy vs. don't-build recommendation per component
- Reference architecture diagrams + sequencing plan
- 60–90 min walkthrough call, in plain language
- Optional: credit toward a follow-on build engagement
Selected work
Projects behind this service.
4 projects that exemplify this service, from prior senior delivery before SerSan.
Common questions
Answers from real projects.
What's the difference between this and a consultant's strategy deck?
We don't ship strategy decks. You get a written recommendation: the architecture, the honest arithmetic, and a risk register a compliance team can defend where one applies. Concrete enough to act on without further interpretation — whether we build it, your own people do, or another supplier does.
What if the audit recommends 'don't build this'?
That's a successful outcome, and it does happen. You've spent a few days of senior time instead of months of build time on the wrong system. We'd rather talk you out of a project than build something we know won't survive production.
Do you sign NDAs?
Standard for audit work. Mutual NDA before access to anything material.
Do we keep the deliverables if we don't engage further?
Yes. The report, the diagrams, and the risk register are yours. Audit fee is paid in full at the audit's end. There's no clawback if you choose not to build.