--- title: "Technology Consulting & Architecture Review" canonical: https://wavect.io/services/technology-consulting/ language: en description: "Independent technology consulting: architecture review, stack and vendor selection, build vs buy and delivery risk. A bounded engagement ending in a written recommendation you own." image: "https://wavect.io/img/general/bak/open_graph_preview.jpg" --- Technology Consulting # Technology consulting that ends in a decision you own. Get an independent read on your architecture, a stack or vendor choice, or a build-or-buy question. We review the evidence, compare the realistic options and hand over a written recommendation your team can act on, with or without us. THE ENGAGEMENT ## One question. Real evidence. A recommendation you keep. 1. **Frame the decision** The question, the options and who signs off. 2. **Review the evidence** Code, architecture, contracts, costs and constraints. 3. **Recommend and walk through** A written report with options, risks and next steps. DIRECT ANSWER Technology consulting answers one consequential technology question, such as an architecture review, a vendor selection or a build-or-buy decision. The engagement is bounded and ends in a written recommendation with options, risks and reasons that your company keeps. Best for - Leaders facing a costly technology decision who want a second opinion that is not a vendor's sales pitch - Teams holding an architecture plan or agency proposal they need checked before committing budget Consider another approach - An ongoing technology lead for roadmap, hiring and delivery accountability - Planning and pricing a defined build, or team training sessions ## Start with the decision, not the technology Name the decision that needs an answer and the date it has to be made. Typical examples are whether an architecture will carry the next stage of growth, which platform or vendor to pick, or whether to build, buy or repair. The engagement ends when that question has a written answer. If you need someone to keep owning those decisions month after month, that is a [Fractional CTO](/services/fractional-cto/) seat. If the direction is set and you need architecture, milestones and a fixed-price offer for a specific build, that is [Software Discovery](/services/software-discovery/). A session to bring your team up to speed on a technology is a [workshop](/services/workshops/), and rolling out AI across your company is [AI Enablement](/services/ai-enablement/). ## The questions this engagement is built for Each engagement covers one primary question. Related questions can be added when they share the same evidence; otherwise they get their own scope. Architecture review Check whether an existing or planned architecture fits the expected load, team size, data ownership and budget. Identify the parts that carry the most risk and what it would take to change them. Technology and vendor selection Compare platforms, frameworks, cloud services or agencies against your actual requirements, total cost and exit options. Proposals you already hold are reviewed on their merits. Build, buy or repair Weigh custom development against standard software, integration or fixing what you have. Keeping the current system, or doing nothing yet, is a legitimate outcome. Roadmap and delivery risk Review a technical roadmap or a delivery plan for unrealistic assumptions, missing dependencies and decisions that are expensive to reverse. ## Independent means the answer does not depend on who builds it Wavect also builds software, so we are explicit about this. The recommendation is written to stand on its own and to be usable by your team or another provider. If the best option is a standard product, your current vendor or not building at all, the report says so. Where Wavect would be a candidate for follow-up work, we state that in the report so you can weigh it. Any follow-up work is quoted separately and is never a condition of the consulting engagement. ## Illustrative decision: replace the platform or fix the bottleneck **Illustrative example, not a customer result:** a team plans to replace its backend because releases have become slow. The review looks at the release history, the architecture and where changes actually get stuck. It finds that most delays come from one tightly coupled module and a manual deployment step, not from the platform itself. The recommendation compares a full replacement with decoupling that module and automating the deployment, lists the cost drivers and risks of each, and names the evidence that would change the conclusion. ## Frame, review, recommend Scope and fee are agreed in writing before work starts. The duration depends on the question and on how quickly we get access to the people and material involved. 1. **Frame the decision** - Agree the question, the options worth comparing, the decision criteria and who accepts the result. 2. **Review the evidence** - Read the relevant code, architecture, documentation, proposals and cost data. Interview the people who know the constraints. Run a focused technical check where it answers a specific question. 3. **Recommend and walk through** - Receive a written recommendation with the options compared, risks, open assumptions and next steps. We walk through it with the decision-makers and answer follow-up questions. ## Bring the decision owner and the material behind it We need the person who will make the call, the constraints that cannot move (budget, deadline, regulation, existing contracts), and read access to the relevant code or documentation. Vendor proposals, cost figures and earlier decision records help. Access is read-only unless a check needs more and you agree to it. The report and any supporting material belong to your company. If the question is the value or risk of a company you are investing in or acquiring, see [Technical Due Diligence](/services/technical-due-diligence/). // proof ## Independent assessment in existing work Cedars documents a scoped technical assessment that paired observations with priorities and recheck criteria. SKD Dresden shows a technology evaluation that ruled out most use cases before anything was built. MyMerch shows outside advice on what to fix first, which led to targeted fixes instead of a rewrite. They demonstrate published scope, not a promise of the same outcome for another decision. ### [Cedars](/case-studies/cedars/) - **Status:** Live - **Outcome:** Evidence trail - Architecture, requirements, assets and responsibilities organized for review. - **Summary:** Documentation structures, targeted source checks and scoped AI assessment gave Cedars a prioritized basis for technical decisions. - **Stack:** PHP, JavaScript, Python ### [SKD Web3 Workshops & Strategy](/case-studies/skd-dresden/) - **Status:** Live - **Outcome:** Multiple - Workshops: Education, Technical, Strategy - **Summary:** Blockchain education, technical and strategy workshops for SKD. An earlier consulting engagement, separate from the Cabinet Coin … ### [MyMerch](/case-studies/mymerch/) - **Status:** Live - **Outcome:** ~50% - Efficiency improvement for the MyMerch team - **Summary:** MyMerch's team puts the efficiency gain at ~50%. Fewer delivery errors, improved Shopify conversion, no rewrite. - **Stack:** Shopify, Shopify Liquid, JavaScript These are selected projects, not our full portfolio. We have shipped 100+ products since 2018. ## Questions before you start ### How is this different from a fractional CTO? A fractional CTO is an ongoing role with decision rights, delivery accountability and a recurring time commitment. Technology consulting is a bounded engagement that answers one question and ends with a report. If the report shows you need ongoing leadership, the [Fractional CTO](/services/fractional-cto/) page explains how that role works. ### Will you recommend that Wavect builds the solution? Only if it is the best option for you, and we say so openly when Wavect would be a candidate. The recommendation is written to be usable by your own team or another provider, and buying a standard product or keeping your current setup are valid outcomes. ### Can you review a proposal or architecture from another agency? Yes. We review it against your requirements, budget and risks, and point out unclear scope, missing assumptions and decisions that are expensive to reverse. We agree beforehand how the findings are shared with that agency, if at all. ### Do you need access to our source code? Only when the question depends on it, as an architecture review usually does. Read-only access to the relevant repositories is normally enough. Credentials and confidential data do not belong in the first enquiry. ### How is this different from discovery or a workshop? [Software Discovery](/services/software-discovery/) plans a defined build and ends in a fixed-price build offer. A [workshop](/services/workshops/) helps a team learn and align. Technology consulting gives you an independent recommendation on one decision, without a build offer attached. ## Choose your next step - [Get an ongoing technology lead](/services/fractional-cto/) - [Plan and price a defined build](/services/software-discovery/) - [Bring your team up to speed](/services/workshops/) ## Structured Data ```json { "@context": "https://schema.org", "@graph": [ { "@id": "https://wavect.io/#organization", "@type": [ "Organization", "ProfessionalService", "LocalBusiness" ], "employee": [ { "@id": "https://wavect.io/team/kevin-riedl/#person", "@type": "Person", "jobTitle": "Managing Director", "name": "Kevin Riedl", "url": "https://wavect.io/team/kevin-riedl/", "worksFor": { "@id": "https://wavect.io/#organization", "@type": [ "Organization", "ProfessionalService", "LocalBusiness" ] } }, { "@id": "https://wavect.io/team/christof-jori/#person", "@type": "Person", "jobTitle": "Managing Director", "name": "Christof Jori", "url": "https://wavect.io/team/christof-jori/", "worksFor": { "@id": "https://wavect.io/#organization", "@type": [ "Organization", "ProfessionalService", "LocalBusiness" ] } } ], "founder": [ { "@id": "https://wavect.io/team/kevin-riedl/#person", "@type": "Person", "jobTitle": "Managing Director", "name": "Kevin Riedl", "url": "https://wavect.io/team/kevin-riedl/", "worksFor": { "@id": "https://wavect.io/#organization", "@type": [ "Organization", "ProfessionalService", "LocalBusiness" ] } }, { "@id": "https://wavect.io/team/christof-jori/#person", "@type": "Person", "jobTitle": "Managing Director", "name": "Christof Jori", "url": "https://wavect.io/team/christof-jori/", "worksFor": { "@id": "https://wavect.io/#organization", "@type": [ "Organization", "ProfessionalService", "LocalBusiness" ] } } ], "legalRepresentative": [ { "@id": "https://wavect.io/team/kevin-riedl/#person", "@type": "Person", "jobTitle": "Managing Director", "name": "Kevin Riedl", "url": "https://wavect.io/team/kevin-riedl/", "worksFor": { "@id": "https://wavect.io/#organization", "@type": [ "Organization", "ProfessionalService", "LocalBusiness" ] } }, { "@id": "https://wavect.io/team/christof-jori/#person", "@type": "Person", "jobTitle": "Managing Director", "name": "Christof Jori", "url": "https://wavect.io/team/christof-jori/", "worksFor": { "@id": "https://wavect.io/#organization", "@type": [ "Organization", "ProfessionalService", "LocalBusiness" ] } } ], "name": "Wavect GmbH", "subjectOf": { "@id": "https://wavect.io/verified-claims.json#dataset", "@type": "Dataset", "creator": { "@id": "https://wavect.io/#organization", "@type": [ "Organization", "ProfessionalService", "LocalBusiness" ] }, "description": "A machine-readable registry of quantitative and qualitative claims published by Wavect, with review dates, localized page appearances and public third-party citations where available.", "inLanguage": "en", "isAccessibleForFree": true, "license": "https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/", "name": "Wavect verified publication claims", "url": "https://wavect.io/verified-claims.json" }, "url": "https://wavect.io/" }, { "@id": "https://wavect.io/team/kevin-riedl/#person", "@type": "Person", "jobTitle": "Managing Director", "name": "Kevin Riedl", "sameAs": [ "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q139796365", "https://www.linkedin.com/in/wsdt", "https://github.com/wsdt" ], "url": "https://wavect.io/team/kevin-riedl/", "worksFor": { "@id": "https://wavect.io/#organization", "@type": [ "Organization", "ProfessionalService", "LocalBusiness" ] } }, { "@id": "https://wavect.io/team/christof-jori/#person", "@type": "Person", "jobTitle": "Managing Director", "name": "Christof Jori", "sameAs": [ "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q139796367", "https://www.linkedin.com/in/jocr77/", "https://github.com/jo-chris" ], "url": "https://wavect.io/team/christof-jori/", "worksFor": { "@id": "https://wavect.io/#organization", "@type": [ "Organization", "ProfessionalService", "LocalBusiness" ] } }, { "@id": "https://wavect.io/#website", "@type": "WebSite", "inLanguage": [ "en", "de", "es", "zh" ], "name": "Wavect", "potentialAction": { "@type": "SearchAction", "query-input": "required name=search_term_string", "target": { "@type": "EntryPoint", "urlTemplate": "https://wavect.io/search/?q={search_term_string}" } }, "publisher": { "@id": "https://wavect.io/#organization", "@type": [ "Organization", "ProfessionalService", "LocalBusiness" ] }, "url": "https://wavect.io/" } ] } ``` ```json { "@context": "https://schema.org", "@graph": [ { "@id": "https://wavect.io/services/technology-consulting/#service", "@type": "Service", "areaServed": [ { "@type": "Country", "name": "Austria" }, { "@type": "Place", "name": "Worldwide" } ], "category": "Training & Advisory", "dateModified": "2026-10-30", "description": "Independent technology consulting: architecture review, stack and vendor selection, build vs buy and delivery risk. A bounded engagement ending in a written recommendation you own.", "name": "Technology Consulting & Architecture Review", "provider": { "@id": "https://wavect.io/#organization", "@type": [ "Organization", "ProfessionalService", "LocalBusiness" ] }, "serviceType": "Technology Consulting", "url": "https://wavect.io/services/technology-consulting/" }, { "@type": "BreadcrumbList", "itemListElement": [ { "@type": "ListItem", "item": "https://wavect.io/", "name": "Home", "position": 1 }, { "@type": "ListItem", "item": "https://wavect.io/services/overview/", "name": "Services", "position": 2 }, { "@type": "ListItem", "item": "https://wavect.io/services/overview/#workshops", "name": "Training & Advisory", "position": 3 }, { "@type": "ListItem", "item": "https://wavect.io/services/technology-consulting/", "name": "Technology Consulting", "position": 4 } ] }, { "@id": "https://wavect.io/services/technology-consulting/#webpage", "@type": "WebPage", "dateModified": "2026-10-30", "description": "Independent technology consulting: architecture review, stack and vendor selection, build vs buy and delivery risk. A bounded engagement ending in a written recommendation you own.", "inLanguage": "en", "isPartOf": { "@id": "https://wavect.io/#website", "@type": "WebSite" }, "mainEntity": { "@id": "https://wavect.io/services/technology-consulting/#service" }, "name": "Technology Consulting & Architecture Review", "url": "https://wavect.io/services/technology-consulting/" } ] } ``` ```json { "@context": "https://schema.org", "@type": "FAQPage", "mainEntity": [ { "@type": "Question", "acceptedAnswer": { "@type": "Answer", "text": "A fractional CTO is an ongoing role with decision rights, delivery accountability and a recurring time commitment. Technology consulting is a bounded engagement that answers one question and ends with a report. If the report shows you need ongoing leadership, the Fractional CTO page explains how that role works." }, "name": "How is this different from a fractional CTO?" }, { "@type": "Question", "acceptedAnswer": { "@type": "Answer", "text": "Only if it is the best option for you, and we say so openly when Wavect would be a candidate. The recommendation is written to be usable by your own team or another provider, and buying a standard product or keeping your current setup are valid outcomes." }, "name": "Will you recommend that Wavect builds the solution?" }, { "@type": "Question", "acceptedAnswer": { "@type": "Answer", "text": "Yes. We review it against your requirements, budget and risks, and point out unclear scope, missing assumptions and decisions that are expensive to reverse. We agree beforehand how the findings are shared with that agency, if at all." }, "name": "Can you review a proposal or architecture from another agency?" }, { "@type": "Question", "acceptedAnswer": { "@type": "Answer", "text": "Only when the question depends on it, as an architecture review usually does. Read-only access to the relevant repositories is normally enough. Credentials and confidential data do not belong in the first enquiry." }, "name": "Do you need access to our source code?" }, { "@type": "Question", "acceptedAnswer": { "@type": "Answer", "text": "Software Discovery plans a defined build and ends in a fixed-price build offer. A workshop helps a team learn and align. Technology consulting gives you an independent recommendation on one decision, without a build offer attached." }, "name": "How is this different from discovery or a workshop?" } ], "speakable": { "@type": "SpeakableSpecification", "cssSelector": [ ".faq-question", ".faq-answer" ] } } ```