Werk 02 — who carries it
Strategy here means the roadmap that survives the budget round. Vision, portfolio, delivery and cost are held together, because a roadmap without a cost model is a wish and a cost model without a roadmap is a cut.
The offer
A technology estate answerable to a number: a roadmap the business recognises, a portfolio governed on value, and a run cost you can defend line by line.
Target architecture ambition translated into a two-to-three-year investment roadmap with named owners and decision gates.
Project portfolio scored on value and risk, kill criteria written down, and a governance forum that actually stops work.
Delivery model, reporting spine and the metrics that make slippage visible before the steering committee hears it in a slide.
Cloud and vendor spend broken down by service and team, with a savings plan and renegotiation levers.
Estate assessment, roadmap, cost baseline and savings plan.
Roadmap stewardship, portfolio arbitration, board reporting.
The roadmap executed, the run cost held to the committed line.
State of the proof
Experiences that prove it
Sub-capabilities and evidence
Publishable figures
Questions
- What does the strategy werk own?
- The technology roadmap and the governance that arbitrates it, the delivery structure that ships it, the vendor arrangements that supply it, and the FinOps discipline that prices it. Four objects, one owner — because the moment they are split across three functions, the arbitration moves to whoever shouts loudest.
- What does FinOps mean inside a mandate?
- That the cost of the estate is a designed outcome rather than a discovered one. Three mandates, three figures: total cost of ownership down 87% at PMU, down 37% at Societe Generale, and EUR 9.5M released at Adeo. Each came from an architecture decision taken with the cost model open, not from a procurement round afterwards.
- Does the collective run PMOs?
- It runs delivery, and that includes the PMO when the mandate needs one. The #OneCarrefour V1 and V2 replatforming was run with 120 FTE under a single accountable technology lead rather than a steering committee, which is the difference between a delivery structure and a reporting structure.
- How large a program does this scale to?
- Programs of EUR 50M to 100M-plus were structured and governed at EY, with five to seven running concurrently and teams of up to 50 consultants. Scale is not the constraint; unowned arbitration is.