Assessment
~/appetizer-labs/platform-engineering

Platform Engineering Consulting

a slide deck about platform strategy — We build the platform with your team and hand it over ready to run.

Consulting and delivery for teams whose releases wait on their own platform: internal developer platform, CI/CD and Kubernetes operations. We build it with you and hand it over, rather than recommending it.

We work in your repository, in your cluster, through your reviews. The engagement ends when your team changes the platform without us — not when a document is signed off.

BOOK A FIT CHECK

Why platform work stalls

Platform work rarely fails on the technology. It fails because nobody ever finishes it: the team keeps operations running, and the platform stays the project for later.

What is left is a half-built layer in between. Scripts one person understands. Pipelines that look different in every team. A cluster nobody wants to be the one to change.

Every week in that state costs delivery speed, and it costs it in every team at once, because they all take the same route into production.

How it shows up day to day

Six situations we meet again and again in platform work. The more of them fit, the less another target-picture discussion will do for you.

What is different afterwards

Not a vision, but states that are either true at the end or are not. Each of them can be checked together with your team.

Which of these are reachable depends on where you start. We say which ones we consider out of reach before the proposal, rather than writing them into it.

What is included

How an engagement runs

Four steps, in this order. You can stop after the second one and still keep a result you can work from.

  1. Fit check

    A conversation about what is not working right now, and about whether we are the right people for it. If we are not, you hear it in that call.

  2. Analysis

    We read the repositories, pipelines and clusters ourselves and write down which bottleneck has which effect on delivery speed.

  3. Delivery inside the team

    Every change goes through a pull request somebody on your team reads. We work in your repositories, not alongside them.

  4. Handover

    Joint operational handover, documentation, and a list of the things we deliberately did not build — with the reasoning.

Engagement models

Four ways into the work. Which one fits is decided in the fit check; the pages behind them state scope, duration and price in full.

What you can check

Plainly: there is no figure from a client engagement on this page. What we built before was never measured in a way that would prove anything here, and we will not invent numbers to fill the gap.

A number belongs in this space. There is none: no earlier engagement measured its effect in a way that would prove anything here. As soon as a client releases a measurement, it goes here — not before.

Relevant case studies

Case studies for this work, with context, intervention and handover. Each one appears only once the client has released it in writing.

No case study for this work is published yet. The first one is being written and is waiting on the client's release.

~/appetizer-labs/not-a-fit

What is not included

The scope of an engagement is only clear once its other half is written down too. These four requests are the ones we turn down in platform work — better before the proposal than halfway through the project.

  • Round-the-clock operations, on-call cover and SLA-backed run responsibility

    We build platforms and hand them over ready to run. Running them is a different business — a managed-service provider can commit to that, we cannot.

  • Certificates, audit sign-off and conformity statements

    Engineering work towards ISO 27001, NIS2 or the EU AI Act is in scope. Issuing the attestation is not: that takes an accredited auditor, not an engineer.

  • Projects with no in-house engineering team

    Knowledge transfer is part of every engagement. With no team to hand over to it turns into permanent outsourcing — a model we do not offer.

  • A fixed price for a whole transformation, quoted before anyone has looked

    Pricing an unexamined legacy estate is guesswork. We estimate after a short assessment — and we will say so when the rebuild is not worth it.

Questions we get about platform work

Do we need a platform team for this?

Not a platform team, but an engineering team. We hand the platform over to people who will change it afterwards; without them the engagement becomes permanent outsourcing, which we do not offer.

We already have a platform. Would you start from scratch?

No. In most engagements a cluster, a pipeline and half a portal already exist. We carry on with them and rebuild only what we can give a reason for rebuilding.

How do you make sure our team can run the platform afterwards?

Through the way we work, not through training at the end. Every change goes through a pull request from your team, runbooks are written at the first incident, and the operational handover is its own step in the plan.

Do you work with alternatives to Kubernetes?

Yes. Most of the work — delivery path, self-service, observability, handover — is independent of the runtime. Where Kubernetes is not the right choice, you hear that before the proposal.

How soon could you start?

We run only a few engagements in parallel, so availability is confirmed before a proposal is written. The fit check gives you a realistic start date, even when it is later than you hoped.

What if the analysis shows the platform is not the problem?

Then that is the result you get. Sometimes the constraint sits in ownership or in how teams are cut, and a platform project is the most expensive possible answer to that.

05
~/appetizer-labs/fit-check

Is the platform your bottleneck?

A conversation about the state of your delivery path — and an honest answer on whether we are the right people for it.

Reader settings

Font size