Senior technology leadership, without the full-time hire.

The technology decisions are piling up. You don't have anyone senior to hand them to. That's the gap this fills, whether it's AI, ageing systems, a vendor contract you can't read, or tech that's fallen behind a business that grew fast.

Selective by design

You are making technology decisions that need senior oversight. You do not have it.

Maybe the business grew faster than the systems did, and now nothing quite joins up. Maybe you've just lost the one person who understood how it all worked. Maybe you're being sold AI tools and can't tell which are worth it, or there's a vendor contract on your desk you can't fully read. Different triggers, same gap underneath: decisions with real financial consequences, being made without anyone in the room who has made them before.

You probably don't need a full-time CIO. You might never need one. But you do need experienced judgment on the decisions that matter, before the contracts are signed and the commitments are locked in.

Why people bring me in

A fractional CIO is rarely hired because someone wants one in the abstract. There is usually a specific problem on the table. These are the most common.

AI is being adopted across the business and nobody has a grip on it

Staff are using tools nobody approved. Data is going to places nobody can name. Vendors are pitching AI products and the comparison is happening on vibes. The exposure is real, and the person who should be holding the line does not exist.

A major technology decision is on the table and there is no one senior to read it

A platform migration, an ERP or CRM choice, a major vendor contract, an AI implementation. Decisions with real money attached, where the cost of getting it wrong is much higher than the cost of getting senior judgment in the room before you commit.

The systems and vendors grew with the business and nothing joins up anymore

Tools that do not talk to each other. Contracts you are not sure you still need. Costs creeping up with no one watching. An MSP doing what it has always done while the business has moved on. The job is untangling it: working out what is actually there, what it is costing you, and what to fix first.

A senior tech person has just left, or never existed, and decisions are stacking up

The one person who understood how it all worked is gone, or was never there in the first place. The owner or executive team is now making technology decisions they are not equipped to make, and the pile is growing.

Compliance pressure is mounting and nobody owns it

Privacy Act changes. Essential Eight maturity expectations. AML/CTF reforms for businesses brought under the Act in 2026. Cyber insurance renewals demanding evidence of controls that do not exist. The pressure is real, the deadlines are real, and there is no one inside the business whose job it is to handle this.

The board or owner needs a technology strategy that aligns with where the business is actually going

The business has a direction. The technology is heading somewhere else. Nobody has written down what the next three years of technology investment should look like, and the conversations at the board or leadership table keep going in circles. The work is to fix that.

Built for businesses between $2M and $20M revenue.

You are large enough that technology decisions have real financial consequences, but not large enough to justify a $300,000+ full-time CIO. You need senior technology oversight applied to specific decisions, not a permanent seat at the executive table.

  • Businesses where the systems have not kept up with how fast the company grew
  • Organisations preparing for or recovering from a major technology decision
  • Companies scaling their technology team for the first time
  • Businesses where technology decisions are currently being made by people whose core expertise is somewhere else

One person. The work does not get handed off.

This advisory is delivered by me directly. I have spent thirty years in technology, from developer through to Chief Information Officer. I have replaced legacy platforms, migrated to AWS and Azure, scaled IT teams from scratch, and delivered major projects under real operational pressure.

I am not an observer. I am a practitioner who has made these decisions and lived with the consequences. That experience is what I bring to your business.

Based in Brisbane, working remotely across Australia.

Availability

Engagements are sized to the problem and scoped before any work begins. Most run between three and six months. Some are shorter, some extend. The fee is agreed up front against the scope, and there are no surprises.

If a bounded engagement uncovers further work worth doing, we discuss continuation at the end. Continuation is a decision made then, not a commitment made now.

What this is not.

Not implementation

I do not build software, configure platforms, or write code for your business. If you need that, I can help you find and evaluate the right people to do it.

Not a vendor

I have no affiliate arrangements. I do not sell AI tools or platforms. My interest is that the decision was made well, not which product you choose.

Not a report that sits on a shelf

Whether it is a short bounded engagement or a longer one, the work is applied directly to real decisions. If you want an independent assessment of AI governance gaps, the Audit service is the right fit.

Not for everyone

Some situations are better served by a full-time hire, a specialist contractor, or a different kind of advisor altogether. If a bounded fractional engagement is not the right shape for what you need, I will tell you honestly and point you somewhere better.

Book a call to discuss fit.

A brief conversation to understand your situation and whether this level of engagement makes sense. No obligation.

Not implementation. Not a vendor.