Delivery friction
Delivery is slowing down, but the team disagrees about the underlying cause.
Services
.NET architecture assessment
Know what to change before committing to a rewrite.
I trace the real code, data and runtime paths behind a complex .NET platform, expose material risks and turn the findings into a modernization sequence your team can execute.
20–30 focused hours*
Typical delivery window: 2–4 weeks
Scope confirmed after discovery
Europe · International remote
* Typical range for a focused scope. Final effort and delivery window depend on system size, complexity, access and critical flows, and are agreed before work begins. The fee covers the agreed deliverables—not every working hour within the calendar window.
Describe the problemWhen this is useful
For systems where technical uncertainty is blocking a business decision
Rewrite uncertainty
A rewrite or cloud migration is being discussed without a reliable map of current risk.
Hidden coupling
Shared databases, services or libraries make small changes unexpectedly expensive.
Architecture drift
Production incidents reveal gaps between the documented architecture and the real system.
Investment decision
Leadership needs an independent technical view before funding the next phase.
Scope
What I examine and deliver
The assessment follows critical business flows across application boundaries rather than reviewing components in isolation.
- Architecture and codebase review focused on business-critical flows
- Current system, dependency and data-flow map
- Evidence-backed risk register and bottleneck findings
- Prioritized modernization roadmap: now, next and later
- Findings workshop with technical and business trade-offs
- Written recommendations your team can implement independently
Process
A focused path from evidence to action
- 01
Frame the decision
Clarify the business concern, critical flows and success criteria.
- 02
Trace the system
Review code, data, integrations, infrastructure and delivery evidence.
- 03
Test the risks
Validate assumptions against telemetry, incidents and representative paths.
- 04
Sequence the work
Rank actions by risk removed, outcome created and implementation dependency.
Expected outcomes
A defensible plan instead of an architecture opinion
A current map of the system and its most consequential dependencies.
Material findings separated from lower-value technical cleanup.
Incremental changes with measurable exit criteria and clear ownership.
40+ microservices
Architecture ownership on an enterprise AWS platform supporting 120,000+ loans and 40,000+ commercial real-estate transactions.
Frequently asked questions
Practical questions before we start
Direct answers about fit, access, scope, delivery and working arrangements.
Do you need full repository and production access?
Useful access depends on the decision being made. Code, architecture and delivery evidence are normally required; production access can often be read-only and limited to relevant telemetry.
Is this a recommendation to rewrite the system?
No. A rewrite is only one possible conclusion and usually the highest-risk one. The assessment looks first for incremental changes that reduce risk and restore delivery control.
Can our internal team implement the roadmap?
Yes. The output is designed to be actionable by your team. I can also deliver a focused implementation sprint when independent execution is useful.
What determines the final scope?
The number of repositories and services, critical flows, data boundaries, available evidence and the business decision the assessment must support.
Can the work be performed remotely?
Yes. I work remotely across Europe and internationally using structured access, written decisions and focused technical workshops.
Start with the real constraint
Replace modernization uncertainty with an evidence-backed roadmap.
Share the system, decision and constraint. I will tell you whether a focused assessment is the right first step.
Describe your engineering problem I usually reply within one business day.