Fixed price • 1–2 days • £4,500
A fixed-price measurement of where your AI adoption really sits and what is holding the next level shut, written for your board, not your backlog. From someone who ships production AI, not slides about it.
Fixed price. One invoice. No procurement cycle needed.
Organisations paying transformation prices for redecoration outcomes.
None of this means your team failed. It means you have reached Level 1 of three: the work got faster, and how it moves stayed the same. The question is whether you're settling, or whether the next two levels are worth the risk-versus-return. That decision starts with measuring where you actually are.
The evidence
The right place to start — and the wrong place to stop.
MIT · The GenAI Divide 2025 · Microsoft Work Trend Index 2026
The evidence
95%of pilots show zero P&L impact — MIT, 2025
16%have redesigned workflows around AI — Microsoft, 2026
The right place to start — and the wrong place to stop.
MIT · The GenAI Divide 2025 · Microsoft Work Trend Index 2026
The Agilist AI Adoption Levels
Level 1 — Task Acceleration
Individual tasks speed up; how work moves stays the same. Most organisations shipping AI features sit exactly here — and most plateau here, because acceleration without redesign just moves the constraint.
Level 2 — Workflow Redesign
Handoffs, verification and decision rights get redesigned around the new economics of the work. This is where task gains become operating gains, and it is the level most AI investment is actually paying for.
Level 3 — New Capability
Work that was economically impractical becomes possible. You reach this level through Level 2, not around it; there is no shortcut past the redesign.
The board question these names unlock: are you paying for Level 3 and measuring Level 1? Why Level 1 plateaus by default is a mechanism with its own page: constraint migration.
A written reading of how far your AI adoption has actually got: structurally, not anecdotally. Most plateaus are not model problems. They are workflow, verification, or decision-rights problems wearing an AI costume.
The single highest-leverage intervention, with the experiment that proves or kills it inside a fortnight. Not a roadmap. A next move.
The output is written for the conversation you are dreading: the one where someone asks what the AI investment produced. You will walk in with a measurement instead of a status update.
Want a smaller first step?
One structured session on where progress has actually stalled — your AI adoption, your transformation, or the shape of the organisation itself. AI is one lens, not the assumption. You leave with a first reading, the three structural causes most likely holding things there, and what I would test first. Not an hour of my time; a defined outcome.
The £750 is credited in full against the AI Maturity Diagnosis — or the Pattern Diagnostic, if the review shows the knot isn't AI — when you book within 30 days. So the first step is risk-free, and the price of the real work does not change.
Find where the constraint actually sits. Not where the org chart says it should be.
Build the thing that proves the pathway exists. Working software, not a slide.
Get it into live use with your people, on real cases, until it is load-bearing without me in the room.
Every engagement has a defined end. Extension is your choice, never my pitch.
I leave, and it keeps running. If you want a consultant who moves in for eighteen months, I am the wrong person — the whole point is that you don't need me.
Most people advising on AI adoption have never shipped any. I have 20+ years in organisational transformation and seven production AI products of my own. The diagnosis comes from practice, and you can check the practice:
The full cost breakdown, published. This is the kind of honesty the diagnosis gives you.
Why AI collapsed the cost of building and what replaced it as the constraint.
Free tool. Cloud APIs vs self-hosting, with the real numbers: amortisation, electricity, caching.
Voice AI, decision engines, full-lifecycle co-pilots. Shipped, live, usable.
Planning around the EU AI Act? The deadline most people panicked about has moved — the real one is December 2027, and the runway is exactly long enough to do this properly. Read the myth-bust →
A structured set of interviews with the people closest to the work (typically four to eight conversations), a review of what was actually built and where the gains stopped, and the written diagnosis delivered within a week of the last interview. Remote by default; on-site by arrangement.
So you can expense it without a procurement cycle, and so neither of us has an incentive to stretch it. £4,500, invoiced once, no day-rate creep.
You own the diagnosis and you can act on it without me. If you want the recommended intervention built and proven, that is a separate, clearly-scoped PoC Sprint — and getting it into daily use afterwards is the Embed Sprint; if the constraint is the operating model itself, the Operating Model Redesign Sprint is the follow-on shape; and if you want the truth on call while you run it yourself, that is Advisor on Call at £1,250 a day. All on the services page, all priced. Extension is your choice, never my pitch.
Then you will know that, in writing, and it will be defensible. "You’re at the right level for now, and here is what would make the next one worth it" is a real answer — and it has been worth the fee to people before.
£4,500 fixed. Your level measured. The constraint named. Your next move identified. And then I leave. Six weeks after that, you're answering a different board question: not "what did the AI spend produce?" but "which workflow do we convert next?"