I spent four decades at the sharp end of enterprise technology. Designing online trading systems in Canada and India. Building enterprise architecture frameworks from scratch. Leading architecture practice across 27 countries at Deloitte.
In 2024 I retired. It didn’t stick. Not because I missed the meetings — I didn’t. But because a problem I’d been watching develop for years suddenly became urgent.
Throughout my career I watched organisations make technology decisions that made perfect sense in isolation but created dangerous concentrations of dependency over time.
At Deloitte I argued — largely unsuccessfully — that we should be moving toward Linux and open source infrastructure. The arguments were sound: the majority of the world’s web servers and all of the fastest supercomputers run Linux. The talent pipeline was moving that way. The economics were compelling.
Some progress happened. Meanwhile, the world has since moved decisively in that direction. Organisations that listened early have options. Those that didn’t are now reckoning with the consequences.
I see the same pattern playing out today with cloud and SaaS dependency on a small number of providers.
The difference is that the geopolitical context has changed fundamentally. What was once primarily a commercial or technical consideration is now also a strategic risk.
I was born in Canada — a country now having its own urgent conversation about technology dependency. I’ve lived in the UK for many years and worked across five continents. I understand how different regulatory environments operate, and what large-scale technology transformation actually looks like in practice.
Over 40 years I developed and adopted multiple frameworks that I now use in my consulting work:
QBAM (Question-Based Architecture Model) — a structured approach that builds current and target state architecture, roadmaps and standards through guided discovery. It produces the usual outputs of enterprise architecture without the usual theatre.
POSM (Probability of Success Matrix) — a diagnostic tool for programmes that aren’t delivering. It helps leadership teams arrive at their own conclusions — the ones they are most likely to act on.
LITSO (Linking Investment to Strategic Objectives) — mapping the connection between technology and change investment to strategic objectives.
ABCD (Assumption Based Continuity Dynamics) — a pragmatic assumption-based risk methodology.
This site runs on self-hosted infrastructure, using open source software and European services. My own working environment follows the same principles.
I know what works, what doesn’t, and what it actually takes to make these transitions — because I’ve done it, and continue to do it.
I work with CxO-level clients across the UK, Europe, Canada and Asia-Pacific. Engagements range from short, focused assessments to longer advisory work.
I work as an individual. You get me — not a team of consultants with me as the figurehead.