Fixed scope.
Fixed price.
Defined outcomes.
Each data consulting & advisory engagement is built for a specific kind of reporting, metric, operating, or AI-readiness friction. Clear scope. VP-level work. Deliverables tailored to your business, your team, and the way decisions get made today.
Data Trust Diagnostic
A structured outside read on where confidence is slipping and where leadership should focus first.
View detailsMetrics Alignment & Registry
Shared metric language for the KPIs leadership uses most.
View detailsBoard Reporting Operating Model
Board reporting that can stand up to scrutiny before the next meeting.
View detailsData Standards & Accountability Framework
Defined standards and ownership for the data that matters most to the business.
View detailsData Team Operating Model
A clearer way for the data function and the business to work together from intake through release.
View detailsEmbedded VP, Data & Analytics
VP-level data leadership, embedded in your business.
View detailsData Trust Diagnostic
A structured outside read on where confidence is slipping, what is holding, and where leadership should focus first.
- Leadership discussions keep circling back to the numbers
- Different teams rely on different reports for the same decision
- Reconciliation and side checks are built into the reporting cycle
- A raise, new executive, or board cycle is increasing the cost of uncertainty
Each deliverable is tailored to your reporting environment, stakeholder mix, and current operating model.
- Stakeholder Interview SummaryCross-functional themes, pressure points, and confidence gaps across the current reporting landscape
- Reporting and Data Artifact ReviewReview of the reports, dashboards, source systems, definitions, and documentation currently shaping decision-making
- Trust and Maturity ScorecardStructured assessment of reliability, ownership, reporting consistency, and readiness for executive use
- Prioritized Issue RegisterRanked list of the conditions creating the most downstream friction, with business impact and urgency noted
- Executive Readout and 90-Day Focus PlanConcise summary of findings, immediate priorities, and the highest-value starting point for leadership
- Up to 7 stakeholder interviews
- Review of existing reports, dashboards, and supporting documentation provided at kickoff
- 1 executive readout
- 1 revision pass
The friction is visible, but the source is not yet fully clear
An internal sponsor who can coordinate access to the right stakeholders, reports, and documentation
- Week 1:
- Kickoff, stakeholder interviews, artifact collection and review
- Week 2:
- Analysis, scoring, focus areas, priority mapping
- Week 3:
- Findings, executive readout, debrief call
Do we need to start here?
Not always. If the source of friction is already clear, a more targeted engagement may be the better fit. This is the right starting point when leadership wants an outside view before choosing a path.
Metrics Alignment & Registry
Shared metric language for the KPIs leadership uses most.
- The same KPI appears with different values across teams
- Definitions shift between dashboards, QBRs, and board materials
- Finance, GTM, and Product are using the same words differently
- Forecast, QBR, or diligence cycles keep surfacing the same metric questions
Each deliverable is tailored to the KPIs your leadership team relies on most.
- In-Scope KPI ListThe metrics covered in the engagement, selected based on your reporting needs and leadership priorities
- Draft KPI Definition PackDefinitions, formulas, inclusions, exclusions, edge cases, and ownership for each KPI in scope
- Two Facilitated Alignment SessionsWorking sessions to resolve interpretation differences, review edge cases, and lock shared business meaning
- Published KPI RegistryApproved definitions, formulas, ownership, and update rules for each in-scope KPI
- Source Map and Change ProtocolVisibility into where each KPI comes from and how future changes should be proposed, reviewed, and documented
- Up to 10 KPIs in scope
- 2 facilitated alignment sessions
- 1 published registry
- 1 revision pass after stakeholder review
Metric meaning is the immediate blocker, not report production
The business owners for the in-scope KPIs, plus the data lead responsible for current reporting logic
- Week 1:
- Kickoff, KPI review, stakeholder input, scope confirmation
- Week 2:
- Definition drafting, source mapping, Alignment Session 1
- Week 3:
- Revisions, edge cases, Alignment Session 2, final registry delivery
Is this the same as board reporting?
No. This engagement locks what the metrics mean. Board Reporting Operating Model focuses on how board-facing KPIs are reviewed, signed off, and released on a repeatable cadence.
Board Reporting Operating Model
Board reporting that can stand up to scrutiny before the next meeting.
- Board prep still depends on exports, spreadsheets, and late-stage checks
- The same KPI lands differently from one board cycle to the next
- Questions about a number trigger side investigation instead of a fast answer
- Leadership wants a process that holds up before the next board meeting
Each deliverable is tailored to your board cadence, KPI set, and current reporting workflow.
- Board KPI StructureRecommended board-facing KPI set, reporting layout, and presentation logic for executive review
- Ownership and Signoff MapDecision rights for KPI meaning, measurement integrity, readiness review, and final signoff
- Board Readiness CheckpointsDefined process for scope lock, verification, comparability notes, review timing, and publish timing
- Quality Gates and Change Log ProtocolMinimum controls before executive review, plus documented handling for KPI changes and release notes
- 30/60/90 Activation PlanSequenced plan to move from the current process to a cleaner board reporting operating model
- Up to 12 board-facing KPIs
- 1 ownership and signoff model
- 1 board readiness cadence
- 1 revision pass
Board reporting is the visible pressure point and leadership wants a process the team can run every cycle
The CFO or finance lead, the current reporting owner, and the data lead supporting board-facing numbers
- Week 1:
- Reporting review, stakeholder interviews, current process assessment
- Week 2:
- KPI structure, ownership model, readiness checkpoints
- Week 3:
- Quality gates, change protocol, activation plan
- Week 4, if needed:
- Review cycle, revisions, final handoff
Do the KPIs need to be fully locked first?
Not necessarily across the whole business. This engagement assumes the board-facing KPI set is already fairly stable or can be finalized within the reporting process. If core metric meaning is still moving across teams, Metrics Alignment & Registry is the cleaner first step.
Data Standards & Accountability Framework
Clear standards and source accountability for the data feeding reporting, planning, and operational decisions.
- Core fields are handled differently across systems or workflows
- The same record type is categorized differently from one team to the next
- Ownership is easier to trace during review cycles than in day-to-day operations
- Leadership wants clearer expectations for how critical data should be created and maintained
- AI adoption is outpacing governance, leaving teams to leverage infrastructure and datasets without responsible use guardrails
Each deliverable is tailored to your highest-impact domains, systems, and handoff points.
- Critical Data Element InventoryThe fields and record types that matter most for reporting, planning, and cross-functional decision-making
- Domain Standards MatrixDefinitions of what complete, accurate, and consistent data should look like by domain
- Source Ownership MapNamed accountability for data creation, maintenance, review, and escalation at the source
- Quality Gate and Incident ProtocolMinimum checks, response expectations, and escalation path when confidence is at risk
- Cross-Functional Operating AgreementsDocumented expectations for how data should be entered, maintained, and handed off across teams
- Up to 2 priority domains or workflows
- 1 standards matrix per domain
- 1 ownership and escalation model
- 1 revision pass
Trust depends on clearer standards and ownership closer to the source
At least one upstream functional owner alongside data leadership
- Week 1:
- Domain scoping, interviews, current-state review
- Week 2:
- Standards design, ownership mapping, decision points
- Week 3:
- Quality gates, incident protocol, operating agreements
- Week 4, if needed:
- Review cycle, revisions, final handoff
How is this different from Data Trust Diagnostic?
Data Trust Diagnostic identifies where confidence is slipping across reporting, ownership, and workflow. Data Standards & Accountability Framework defines the standards and accountability structure needed to support it.
Data Team Operating Model
A clearer way for the data function and the business to work together from intake through release.
- Requests arrive through multiple channels and with uneven context
- Priority decisions are made case by case, with little shared logic
- Stakeholders are unsure what is in flight, what is next, or how tradeoffs are made
- The team spends too much energy coordinating work that should move more cleanly
Each deliverable is tailored to your team structure, request flow, and business operating context.
- Intake Model and Request TemplateA consistent path for work to enter the data function with the context needed to evaluate it properly
- Prioritization FrameworkDecision model for weighing business value, urgency, dependency, effort, and sequencing
- Delivery Workflow and QA CheckpointsDefined path from intake to build to validation to release, with review points and ownership called out
- Stakeholder Communication ModelDefined update points, decision checkpoints, and release communications for work in flight
- Operating Calendar and Adoption PlanMeeting structure, review points, rollout approach, and reinforcement plan to help the model hold over time
- 1 team or function in scope
- Review of current intake and request channels
- 1 operating model design
- 1 revision pass
The team has capability, but the function needs a more disciplined way of working
Data leadership and the teams that submit the highest volume of requests
- Week 1:
- Team interviews, workflow review, backlog and request-channel assessment
- Week 2:
- Intake design, prioritization model, role and review structure
- Week 3:
- Delivery workflow, QA checkpoints, stakeholder communication model
- Week 4:
- Operating calendar, adoption plan, review cycle
- Week 5, if needed:
- Revisions, final handoff, rollout guidance
Is this about process or org design?
The primary output is the operating model. It can inform role design, but the focus is clearer workflow, priority discipline, and stronger handoffs across the function.
Embedded VP, Data & Analytics
VP-level data leadership, embedded in your business.
- The data function has capability, but senior direction is intermittent
- Leadership needs one partner to sequence priorities and tradeoffs
- A leadership transition or growth inflection calls for executive coverage
- The next phase of work needs sustained sponsorship, not another one-time project
Each engagement is shaped around your current team, executive priorities, and what the business needs next.
- Function Review and 90-Day RoadmapAssessment of the current state, immediate priorities, and the next set of decisions
- Executive Working Session CadenceRecurring leadership sessions to review tradeoffs, direction, ownership, and progress
- Team Leadership SupportGuidance on priorities, unblockers, accountability, and operating discipline across the function
- Stakeholder Alignment and Executive ReadoutsCross-functional clarity on what matters now, what comes next, and what needs support from the business
- Operating Model OversightOngoing direction across standards, reporting discipline, leadership priorities, and longer-term transition planning
- Minimum 3-month term
- Meeting cadence and availability defined in discovery
- Scope shaped around current priorities and leadership need
- Additional depth or hours scoped separately
The need is ongoing leadership rather than a single project
A named executive counterpart and internal owners who can execute between sessions
- Month 1:
- Function review, stakeholder assessment, roadmap development
- Month 2:
- Priority sequencing, leadership sessions, operating model oversight
- Month 3:
- Sustainability review, transition plan, renewal decision
Why a three-month minimum?
Traction takes more than a roadmap. Three months is the minimum for priorities, working structure, and accountability to start taking hold.
Thirty minutes to know if this is the right fit.
You bring the friction point. I’ll tell you which engagement fits, where the overlap is, and whether a custom scope makes more sense.
Book a Free Discovery CallNo pitch. No proposal until we’ve talked.