Technology Strategy Assessment
Most organisations invest in technology without being able to explain which business objective each peso supports. We evaluate the alignment between your business strategy and your technology portfolio, and build the investment roadmap for the next 12 to 36 months.
The assessment reviews what the business is pursuing, which technology capabilities support it today and where the mismatch sits. It turns that mismatch into a prioritised investment roadmap, aligned with the business areas and with an economic case per initiative. It is not a systems inventory: it is an alignment evaluation.
Know what each investment supports
Every peso of the technology budget tied to a business objective, or identified as spend with no clear destination.
Put the portfolio in order
What to keep, modernise, retire and build, on criteria rather than urgency.
Defend the budget
An argument with figures to support the investment before leadership and the board.
One surveys and maps the route. The other executes it.
These are two different services and it is worth knowing which one you need before contracting. The assessment does the first information-gathering exercise, builds the roadmap and aligns it with the business areas. The consulting practice executes that roadmap.
Technology Strategy Assessment — this page
Surveys, maps and aligns. It surveys business objectives, current capabilities and the portfolio; measures the alignment gap; builds the investment roadmap and agrees it with the areas. It runs two to four weeks depending on the size of the organisation. It does not implement, does not configure and does not operate anything.
Strategic Consulting — execution
Executes the roadmap. It takes the roadmap and puts it into practice: target architecture design, portfolio definition, support during execution and governance of the initiatives. It works just as well if you already have a roadmap of your own.
Eight fronts, evaluated one by one.
Misalignment does not concentrate in a single place. We review each front with the same depth and rate it by maturity level, so the result can be compared against itself the following year.
Business objectives
What the organisation is pursuing over 12–36 months and how much of that depends on a technology capability.
Application portfolio
Which systems exist, which process each one supports, and where they overlap.
Target architecture
Where the platform should move to support what the business wants to do.
IT governance
How investments are decided and prioritised, and who answers for the outcome.
Budget and cost
Where the spend goes, what is operation and what is investment, and what return is being measured.
Team capabilities
What the internal team can do, what is outsourced, and where the critical dependency sits.
Data and decisions
Which information supports business decisions and how far it can be trusted.
Risk and continuity
How exposed the operation is to a failure, an incident or the exit of a supplier.
Six phases, without interrupting your operation.
The assessment rests on interviews, portfolio review and documentary analysis. There is no intervention on your systems at any point.
Scope and preparation
We define which units, processes and systems are in, and agree the access needed to documentation.
Business interviews
With leadership and area heads, to understand what is expected of technology.
Portfolio survey
Inventory of systems, contracts, costs and dependencies, checked against what the interviews said.
Gap analysis
Comparison against COBIT, ISO/IEC 38500 and TOGAF, capability by capability.
Economic case
Each initiative with effort, estimated cost and the business objective it supports.
Business alignment
Presentation of the roadmap with leadership and the areas, so priorities are agreed rather than imposed by IT.
What your maturity is measured against.
The evaluation does not rest on the judgement of whichever consultant shows up, nor on a vendor catalogue, but on public and auditable frameworks your team can consult and your auditor will recognise. The strategy is grounded in the context where it will be executed: budgets in local currency, approval cycles, and the talent actually available in Colombia and Mexico.
COBIT 2019
Evaluation framework. IT governance and management. It orders the maturity rating by governance objective.
ISO/IEC 38500
Evaluation framework. The corporate governance of IT standard: who decides, on what criteria and to whom they answer.
TOGAF
Architecture guide. Structures the target architecture and the gap analysis between what exists and what is needed.
IT4IT
Value-chain guide. Orders the portfolio by the flow that runs from strategy to operation, not by technology.
ITIL 4
Service guide. Used to evaluate how what is already in production gets delivered and sustained.
PMI
Portfolio guide. Prioritisation criteria and management of the initiative portfolio that comes out of the roadmap.
The frameworks are public and verifiable: anyone on your team can consult them and check the rating we deliver. That is the difference between an auditable evaluation and an opinion.
What it costs to invest without a route.
None of these risks shows up in a quarter. They all accumulate until next year's budget is no longer enough to correct them.
Investment with no destination
Technology gets bought out of urgency or fashion, and nobody can explain which objective it supports.
Overlapping portfolio
Several systems do the same thing, three licences get paid, and no area wants to give up theirs.
Silent technical debt
What gets postponed each year becomes more expensive, until it blocks a business initiative.
Decisions without an owner
Without governance, priority goes to whoever pushes hardest, not to what creates most value.
Supplier dependency
Knowledge and control end up outside, and changing supplier becomes unviable.
Indefensible budget
The committee meets and the technology investment cannot be backed with figures.
What it costs you in time, said upfront.
An assessment that does not state the commitment it requires ends up delayed. This is what we need from your side to deliver on time.
Two to four weeks
Two weeks in organisations of up to 50 employees; four between 51 and 300. The timeline is agreed before starting.
Scheduled interviews
Sessions with leadership, area heads and the IT team, scheduled at the start of the project.
Read-only access
Queries against the platforms and existing documentation. At no point is a configuration modified.
A single point of contact
One person coordinating schedules and access. It is the factor that most affects hitting the deadline.
Whatever documentation exists
IT budget, systems inventory, current contracts and previous plans, in whatever state they are in.
A closing session
The presentation of findings with leadership and the areas involved, where the roadmap priorities are agreed.
When it makes sense and when it does not.
It makes sense if…
Your organisation is about to set the technology budget for the next cycle; you suspect you are paying for systems that overlap; you need to justify the investment to the board; or you are entering a growth stage and do not know whether the current platform supports it.
Probably not if…
You already have the roadmap defined and what you need is to execute it: go straight to Strategic Consulting. Or if the problem is day-to-day operation rather than direction: that is measured by the IT Maturity Assessment.
What you gain from the assessment.
Investment with a destination
Every initiative tied to a business objective, not to a technical preference.
An ordered portfolio
What to keep, modernise, retire and build, with explicit criteria.
A defensible roadmap
A 12–36 month plan with estimated cost and expected value per initiative.
Clearer governance
Who decides, on what criteria and with what information.
Fewer budget surprises
The cost of technical debt and contracts stops appearing halfway through the year.
Real alignment
Priorities are agreed with the areas, not communicated afterwards.
Why this evaluation and not an inventory.
The difference is not in listing systems: it is in translating the gap between business and technology into decisions leadership can take and fund.
Evaluation, not inventory
A list of systems does not say whether they support the strategy. Alignment is measured against business objectives.
Recognised frameworks
The comparison is against COBIT, ISO/IEC 38500 and TOGAF, not against whichever consultant shows up.
Business language
Each gap with its cost of inaction and the objective it puts at risk, in terms leadership understands.
Vendor independence
The roadmap is not shaped by what would suit us to sell afterwards.
No interruption to operations
Interviews and document review. No intervention on production systems.
Continuity into execution
If you decide to delegate, the roadmap connects with Strategic Consulting and IT Strategic Plan without starting the survey again.
As-Is, To-Be and the plan to get from one to the other.
Every assessment closes with the same structure, whatever the practice: where you stand today, where you need to be, what separates the two states and in what order that distance gets closed.
Current state — As-Is
The starting point surveyed with evidence, not declared in an interview: what exists, how it operates and how far it sits from what the business needs.
Target state — To-Be
Where the organisation needs to get to, defined with the business areas rather than imposed by the consultant. It is the benchmark everything else is measured against.
Gap analysis
Every difference between the As-Is and the To-Be, with everything required to close it: technology, processes, people, governance and budget. No gap is stated without what it demands.
Risk matrix
Each gap rated by probability and business impact, so priority does not depend on who pushes hardest but on what it costs to leave it open.
Work plan
The concrete sequence to reach the To-Be: what comes first, what it depends on, how much effort it takes and who should answer for each front.
Business alignment
The plan is presented and agreed with the areas involved. A roadmap signed only by IT does not survive the first quarter.
How what you receive is structured.
The central deliverable is a report with a fixed structure, designed so leadership reads the first pages and the technical team works with the rest.
Executive summary
Two pages: level of alignment, the three gaps that weigh most and what decision each one calls for.
Maturity by front
Rating of the eight fronts with the gap made explicit against COBIT and ISO/IEC 38500.
Portfolio map
Systems, the processes they support, cost and overlaps, with the evidence behind them.
Target architecture
Where the platform should move to and what separates it from where it is today.
Investment roadmap
Initiatives prioritised over 12–36 months, with effort, estimated cost and expected value.
Immediate actions
What can be corrected or retired without a project or additional budget.
What you receive at the end.
- Current state (As-Is): alignment between business strategy and technology portfolio, rated across each of the eight fronts.
- Application portfolio inventory with cost, supported process and overlaps.
- Target state (To-Be): destination architecture and portfolio, defined and agreed with the business areas.
- Gap analysis between the As-Is and the To-Be, with each gap, its evidence and everything required to close it: technology, processes, people, governance and budget.
- Risk matrix: each gap rated by probability and business impact, with the cost of leaving it open.
- Work plan to reach the To-Be: initiatives prioritised over 12–36 months, with sequence, dependencies and a suggested owner.
- Business case per initiative, with effort and expected value.
- Governance recommendations: who decides and on what criteria.
- Immediate-impact actions, executable without additional budget.
- Executive presentation for committee and leadership.
- Alignment session with the business areas involved.
About the Technology Strategy Assessment.
What exactly do you evaluate?+
How does it differ from strategic consulting?+
Is it the same as an IT Strategic Plan?+
Does it interrupt our operation?+
Who should take part on our side?+
Is it useful if we already have an IT plan?+
What horizon does the roadmap cover?+
How often should we repeat it?+
Know what every peso you invest in technology supports.
Book your Technology Strategy Assessment and get a prioritised investment roadmap, with an economic case per initiative, agreed with the business areas.
Book my assessment → See the Strategic Consulting →