Turning erratic global delivery into something the business could plan around
Yondr could not plan beyond a quarter. Within three months development teams were producing consistent output every sprint, and within six the predictability had reached support and security.
- regions: UK, USA, Singapore
- 3
- to consistent sprint output
- 3 months
- predictability extended across functions
- Dev + security + support
We made delivery predictable enough that Yondr could plan beyond a single quarter for the first time.
- Client
- Yondr
- Duration
- 6 months
- Sector
- Digital infrastructure and data centres, United Kingdom, USA and Singapore
- Engagement shape
- Delivery predictability across UK, USA and Singapore engineering teams.
What we walked into
Yondr's global digital teams delivered inconsistently, so the business could not plan beyond a quarter. That unpredictability was most damaging in the UK and USA, where reliable delivery was critical to scaling data centre operations.
The work itself
Run against The Tenhaw Way, which is published in full and free to adopt without engaging us.
We introduced accurate Story Point estimation, adjusted post-completion to reflect real capacity, and embedded the agile ceremonies that were missing: retrospectives, planning, and active backlog management. The work ran remotely across three regions, reinforced with on-site workshops.
What came out of it
- regions: UK, USA, Singapore
- 3
- to consistent sprint output
- 3 months
- predictability extended across functions
- Dev + security + support
Within three months development teams were producing consistent output every sprint. By six months that predictability had reached support and security teams, and the business could finally plan holistically.
Why a buyer usually lands on this one
Written for the person arriving mid-programme with a question.
Predictability is a precondition, not a nice-to-have
You cannot safely introduce agents into a system whose human delivery you cannot yet measure. The measurement is the baseline every later claim about automation is measured against. Without it, a 30% improvement is an anecdote.
It is also the answer to the request we hear most often, which is from a business that wants to scale AI agents across teams whose current throughput nobody can state to within a factor of two.
Data centres, and the regime that now applies to them
Yondr builds and operates data centres, which the EU names as digital infrastructure under NIS2. An operator in scope carries management-body accountability for risk measures, incident reporting on short clocks, and supply-chain security obligations reaching the vendors inside the facility.
NIS2 post-dates this engagement, and our work covered the UK, US and Singapore operations rather than an EU compliance programme. This is a description of what the regime asks of an operator today, not work we delivered. What is relevant is where it bites: reporting an incident within a 24-hour initial clock is a delivery-capability question before it is a legal one, because it depends on whether support, security and development teams share a cadence and a single view of the work. That is precisely what the six months described here produced.
What this engagement does not claim
The same caveats the case studies hub carries, narrowed to this engagement so nothing here is a surprise to your analyst.
- 01
Not an AI engagement, and not a compliance engagement.
Agile delivery and predictability work across three regions. We did not deliver a NIS2 readiness programme and we claim no NIS2 expertise.
- 02
The regions were not equally weighted.
The work ran remotely across the UK, USA and Singapore, reinforced with on-site workshops. The UK and USA were where unpredictability was most damaging and where most of the effort landed.
What transfers is the baseline. You cannot state an automation improvement in a system whose human throughput nobody can currently state to within a factor of two, and this is the work of getting to that number. What does not transfer is any AI content: there were no models and no agents here, and predictability is a precondition for automation rather than evidence of it.
Programme & Delivery Management
We will govern the programme whether or not we are building any of it. £18k–£35k / month · Programme duration.
What that engagement coversOther engagements
Sector first, because that is the next question. All twelve are on the hub, grouped into the two we would call AI work and the ten we would not.
Roughly a year of stalled work, rebuilt as a working proof of concept in two weeks
12 months → 2 weeks, prior build effort rebuilt as a working proof of concept
Standing up the delivery engine behind a £40bn hydrogen business case
£40bn, business case underpinned
Landing the Discovery+ launch on a CEO-set deadline
6, development teams coordinated
Want the same thing, in your organisation?
A 30-minute call with James Rooney. We will tell you which parts of this we have done before and which we would be doing for the first time, and you will leave with a rough scope either way.
Most organisations start with a fixed-price Agent-Readiness Audit · £30k–£90k · 6–8 weeks