Are your developers actually using today's techniques? You don't know — and they may not either.

You have a dev team. They ship. Sprints close, tickets move, deploys go out. But underneath that calm surface there's a question you can't answer: are they using the techniques that are genuinely possible today, or last year's playbook with a few new tools sprinkled on top? Which AI tooling fits where, which automation should be running but isn't, which 1-day CI/CD upgrades would compound week after week? And your team probably won't tell you — not out of bad faith, but because they don't always know what they don't know. The market is moving fast. Companies that miss this round of AI tooling and modern automation are quietly paying 30–50% more per shipped feature than their competitors. Not catastrophically — just consistently, every quarter, on every line item. That's the gap this consulting closes.

We hold your team's process up against the modern playbook. Given your codebase, your domain risk profile and your team's seniority distribution: which AI tooling would save them the most hours per sprint? Which automation is sitting there waiting to be turned on? Which CI/CD upgrade would catch the bug that's biting once a quarter? Which spec-driven approach would stop the same architectural arguments from coming back? The goal is concrete and measurable: more output per developer-hour, lower cost per shipped feature, no painful rebuild needed to get there. Every recommendation comes with a quantified impact — hours saved per sprint, euros saved per month — so leadership can make the call on a budget basis, not on faith.

Everything is remote. I work from Cholula, Mexico (GMT-6) — useful overlap with European business hours, no airfare on your invoice. The flow: • Screenshare sessions to see how the team actually moves through a Wednesday afternoon — ticket flow, code, reviews, deploys, the rituals. • 1-on-1 video interviews with a handful of devs and one or two product/business people. Confidential. Devs say things in private they will never say in the standup. • Read-only repo + CI access. Recent PRs, branch hygiene, build pipelines, dependency state — all reviewed async, on my own time. • Slack or your tool of choice for the running conversation. Nothing requires me to be physically present, and the engagement is priced accordingly. That's part of how we keep your cost basis lower than a Dutch consultancy that bills travel hours.

Most teams either banned AI tools two years ago and never revisited, or use them as a chat assistant and wonder why output didn't double. The reality is more nuanced: which tool, when, with which discipline, on which kind of task — that's what determines whether AI tooling adds 30% to throughput or quietly burns developer hours debugging code that nobody understands. We map your codebase, your team's seniority distribution, your domain risk profile, and recommend a concrete AI-adoption plan: which tools (Cursor, Claude Code, ChatGPT, n8n, Make and a few others), what to do and not do with them, how to integrate them into review and deploy flows, and what guardrails actually keep code quality high. Spec-driven design instead of prompt-driven hope.

Most teams have a CI pipeline that runs tests and pretends that's enough. We look at what catches problems and what doesn't: pre-merge checks, type/lint coverage, security scanners, automated migrations testing, preview deploys, smoke tests after release, rollback procedures actually being practised. We look at branch hygiene, PR-template usefulness, dependency upgrade discipline, dead code accumulation. We look at how documentation lives or dies. None of these are big-bang projects — they're 1-day or 2-day improvements that compound week after week. We rank them by ROI per developer-hour, with the highest-impact ones at the top.

€150/hour, billable per half-day or per day. A typical engagement looks like this: • Audit phase (1–3 days): screenshare observation, 1-on-1 interviews, first patterns • Code review phase (1–2 days): proper async reads of recent PRs across the team's repos • Findings & costed plan (½–1 day): a written, ranked document, each item with hours-saved-per-sprint or euros-saved-per-month • Optional implementation day(s): I work alongside the team on the top items, so you walk away with a kite already in the air, not just a recommendation Budget for a full audit usually lands between €4,000 and €9,000 depending on team size and codebase scope. The findings document explicitly projects total efficiency gain and annualised cost savings — almost always a multiple of the consulting cost. After the audit, optional ongoing mentorship is available at a few hours a month for teams that want help executing. No retainers, no lock-in, just hourly billing.