The strategy layer before you build.

AI native consulting is the strategic layer that comes before an AI build: an assessment of how ready your organization is to become AI-native, a build-vs-buy decision, an architecture blueprint, and a sequenced roadmap. Unlike a pure strategy firm, we don't hand the roadmap to someone else to execute — the same engagement can flow straight into a scoped, fixed-price build with the team that wrote the roadmap staying accountable for it.

No. We scope, contract, and deliver the work ourselves — staffed by a hand-picked network of senior AI experts that we vet and manage directly. You're never handed off to a freelancer to coordinate alone; we stay the single point of accountability for the outcome, the price, and the week-7 guarantee. We're not a marketplace and we don't refer you to a third party and disappear — we assemble and manage a vetted network of senior AI experts ourselves, and stay accountable end-to-end for scope, price, and delivery. No vendor referral fees change hands, and no rating-and-hope profile page stands between you and the person doing the work.

They sit at different altitudes of the same engine. AI automation consulting starts from a specific workflow you already suspect should be automated and moves fast into architecture, build, and production. AI native consulting starts one level up — before you've picked a workflow — with the assessment, build-vs-buy call, and 12-month roadmap for becoming an AI-native organization overall. Both end in the same place: a scoped, fixed-price build delivered by the same accountable team. Most engagements that start here narrow into an automation-consulting scope once the roadmap picks the first workflow.

Four deliverables from the Assessment phase: an AI-readiness scorecard against your real systems and data, a build-vs-buy recommendation with the trade-offs documented, an architecture blueprint (model family, retrieval approach, deployment surface), and a 12-month roadmap sequencing which workflows to automate first and why. Each roadmap phase is priced separately so you can commit workflow by workflow instead of one large upfront bet.

Assessment is fixed-price at $4,000-$7,000 for 1-2 weeks — a scorecard, build-vs-buy call, architecture blueprint, and roadmap. If the roadmap points to a build, that phase is scoped and priced separately from the Assessment output, typically $15,000-$40,000 per workflow with production by roughly week 6-10. Assessment is the only commitment to start; nothing downstream is bundled or assumed.

Both, working as one team. We lead every engagement and stay the accountable point of contact throughout, and we staff in senior specialists from our vetted network when the roadmap calls for depth we don't need to carry full-time — a healthcare compliance architect, a retrieval specialist, a specific model's fine-tuning expert. You never manage a network expert directly or coordinate a handoff; every specialist reports through us, and we remain responsible for the scope, the price, and the delivery date regardless of who's staffed.

Interview plus reference check plus a scoped trial task before anyone joins an active engagement, and we only staff someone we'd be willing to stay accountable for. That last part is the filter that matters: because we don't get to walk away if a network expert underperforms — we own the outcome — we vet harder than a marketplace rating system ever will, and we replace anyone who doesn't meet the bar without you having to notice or manage it.

Often, no — or a lighter version of it. If your team already has a clear build-vs-buy answer and an architecture direction, we'll say so and scope straight into a build SoW instead of billing you for an assessment you don't need. Where it's still useful with an internal team: an outside AI-readiness scorecard for board or budget conversations, or an architecture second opinion before a large build commitment. We'll tell you honestly which applies in a free scoping call before any Assessment is billed.

No. The Assessment output — scorecard, build-vs-buy recommendation, architecture blueprint, roadmap — is yours to take in-house, to a different vendor, or back to us. If you continue with us, the build is scoped and priced as its own phase with its own fixed price and its own week-7 production guarantee. Nothing about the Assessment obligates you to the build, and nothing about the network model changes who you deal with if you do continue: still us, still accountable end to end.

You can, and for a narrow, well-defined task that's often the right call — we'll tell you so in a scoping call rather than sell you an Assessment you don't need. Where a solo freelancer usually breaks down is coordination and continuity: no one owns the outcome if the freelancer under-delivers or moves on mid-engagement, no one else has the context if a second specialist is needed, and there's no accountable party for price or the delivery date. The network model exists specifically to remove that risk — you get senior specialist depth without becoming the project manager who has to coordinate, vet, and backstop them yourself.