Analytics & AI Spend Rationalization Review
When spend is rising but executive confidence is not.
A CFO-facing review for companies that need to defend analytics spend, simplify reporting workflows, and stop funding AI pilots without trusted numbers underneath.
Offer details
| Fee | $25k to $50k |
|---|---|
| Best fit | CFO, CEO, board, or PE-backed executive team with cost pressure and number-trust problems |
| Stephen time | 35 to 70 hours depending on breadth, artifacts, and stakeholder complexity |
| Format | Executive review of spend, workflows, trust gaps, and decision-quality risk |
Exact deliverables
- Spend and workflow risk map
- Cut, keep, rebuild, or stop roadmap
- Decision-quality risk summary
- Tool and vendor rationalization recommendations
- AI workflow review
- Executive readout
When to use it
When spend is rising but executive confidence is not.
This review is for situations where reporting costs keep rising, AI pilots keep spreading, and leadership still cannot say which work improves decisions.
Analytics spend is hard to defend.
Multiple systems and vendors overlap without clear decision benefit.
Teams copy, reconcile, adjust, and explain the same numbers every cycle.
AI pilots exist, but ROI and source-number trust are unclear.
Inputs requested
- Vendor and tool list
- BI and cloud data platform list
- Approximate spend categories
- AI tools and pilots
- Consultant, contractor, and team workflow overview
- Executive reporting package and manual reporting workflows
What is excluded
- No procurement execution
- No vendor renegotiation
- No dashboard rebuilds
- No data pipeline development
- No tool implementation or migration management unless separately scoped later
Review output
A roadmap leadership can act on.
The review separates essential decision infrastructure from waste, duplication, and uncontrolled logic.
Fit check
Use this only when cost pressure is real.
The first call determines whether there is real cost pressure and whether a narrower Debt Ledger would be the better first step.