Global humanitarian organisation
Independent technical due diligence that saved 60% of proposed budget
- misattributed vendor debt
- 60%
- weeks to complete
- 2-3
Get objective technical assessment for acquisition, investment, or partnership decisions. I evaluate architecture quality, technical debt, team capability, and delivery risk, providing the validation you need to make confident decisions.
Global humanitarian organisation
You're evaluating an acquisition, investment, or strategic partnership. You need to understand the technical reality behind the pitch deck. Is the architecture sound? Is the technical debt manageable? Can the team actually deliver what they're promising?
Technical due diligence provides independent assessment of technology assets, team capability, and delivery risk. I work across three distinct contexts:
Each context has different priorities, but all require the same thing: objective, expert analysis that translates technical findings into business decisions.
You get a clear, jargon-free report that answers the questions investors and boards actually care about: What are the technical risks? What will it cost to fix the problems? Can this team execute their roadmap?
Technical due diligence engagements are typically scoped based on deal complexity and timeline:
Comprehensive review of system architecture, code structure, and technical decisions with impact assessment and remediation cost estimates.
Assess the technical team's capability to execute their roadmap including team structure, skill distribution, and delivery velocity.
Evaluate technology choices for sustainability and risk including vendor lock-in, licensing risk, and scalability.
Review security practices, authentication/authorisation design, data protection measures, and compliance posture.
Assess the organisation's ability to deliver their roadmap including velocity trends and technical debt trajectory.
For acquisitions, evaluate technical integration complexity and cost with timeline and cost estimates.
I've assessed technical organisations from the inside as a CTO and architect. I know the difference between technical debt that's manageable and architectural decisions that will require expensive rewrites.
My assessments follow a structured methodology covering seven core domains: technology stack and architecture, security and compliance, scalability, technical debt, development practices, team capability, and intellectual property.
I use AI-augmented analysis tools to assess large codebases quickly. The same approach I used to analyse 390+ repositories for documentation coverage and identify architectural patterns.
All engagements are conducted under strict confidentiality. You get a structured report prioritising technical risks by business impact, with specific recommendations and cost estimates for remediation.
Technical due diligence is an independent assessment of a technology platform, codebase, or technical team, typically performed before investment, acquisition, or major partnership decisions. You need it when evaluating a potential acquisition target, assessing technical risk before investment, validating vendor claims, or planning technology transitions. It provides objective analysis of technical quality, scalability, security, and risk to inform business decisions.
I use a combination of AI-augmented analysis tools and hands-on expert review. Automated tools scan for code quality issues, security vulnerabilities, and architectural patterns across the entire codebase (I've analysed 390+ repositories in a single engagement). Senior review then focuses on architectural decisions, scalability concerns, technical debt severity, and team capability assessment. Reports are jargon-free and prioritised by business impact, not just technical severity.
Reports include an executive summary with risk rating, codebase quality assessment, technology stack evaluation, scalability and performance analysis, technical debt quantification, team capability assessment, and prioritised recommendations. Reports are written for business decision-makers, translating technical findings into commercial risk and opportunity language.
Typical engagements range from 3-5 days for focused assessments to 10-15 days for comprehensive reviews, depending on the size of the ecosystem. AI-augmented analysis significantly accelerates codebase review. Most clients need results quickly for transaction timelines, so I structure engagements to deliver initial findings within the first week.
I combine CTO-level strategic perspective with hands-on architect experience and AI-augmented analysis tools. This means faster, deeper assessment than traditional manual reviews, business-impact prioritisation rather than just technical checklists, and jargon-free reporting for non-technical stakeholders.
M&A due diligence focuses on integration: Can we merge these systems? What will it cost? Are there deal-breakers that affect valuation? Investor due diligence focuses on growth potential: Can this technology scale 10x? Is there a defensible competitive moat? Can this team execute?
Technical health checks are for proactive assessment outside of transaction pressure. Common triggers include new CTO onboarding, pre-fundraising preparation, annual governance reviews, post-incident improvement planning, or technology roadmap validation. Health checks emphasise improvement roadmaps and ongoing advisory rather than go/no-go recommendations.
Critical red flags include undisclosed security breaches or unpatched vulnerabilities, massive technical debt requiring complete rewrites, key person dependencies, IP ownership issues, compliance violations, and unrealistic roadmaps. I distinguish between deal-breakers and yellow flags that are manageable with proper planning.
Technical due diligence is priced on a project basis following a scoping call. Every engagement starts with a free 30-minute discovery conversation. Based on this, I provide a fixed-price proposal covering the agreed scope and deliverables.