Tenhaw vs Internal taskforce
The cheapest option, and the one that most often stalls at pilot.
- Cost. Internal taskforce: Effectively free
- £20k–£55k for a PoC
- Domain knowledge. Internal taskforce: Already deep
- Acquired in weeks
- Can change roles and decision rights. Internal taskforce: No mandate
- Yes, it is the engagement
The short answer: Tenhaw or Internal taskforce
An internal AI taskforce is the cheapest and most common starting point, and for early exploration it is the right call, because nobody knows your business better than your own people. It stalls at a predictable point: the taskforce proves agents work in a pilot, then cannot scale because scaling requires changing roles, decision rights and governance across functions the taskforce has no authority over. Tenhaw is usually brought in at exactly that moment, and our advice is to run the taskforce first and call us when it hits the wall.
The case for running an internal AI taskforce
Weigh these first. They are real advantages, and on some programmes they are the deciding factor.
- Effectively free: uses people already on payroll
- Unmatched institutional and domain knowledge
- Builds internal enthusiasm and capability
- Discovers the real friction points faster than any external party can
- No procurement, no contracts, no supplier onboarding
Which should you choose?
There is a real answer here, and it is not always us.
Tenhaw
is the right call when:
- Pilots succeeded and then went nowhere: the classic signal
- Adoption plateaued somewhere around 30% and stopped
- The taskforce cannot change roles or governance because it has no mandate to
- Different functions are building incompatible things in parallel
- Your risk and audit functions have started asking questions nobody can answer
Internal taskforce
is the right call when:
- You are still exploring what agents can do: run the taskforce, it is the right first move
- Your organisation is small enough that one team's decisions affect everyone anyway
- You have not yet hit the scaling wall and cannot justify spend before you do
If that is you, say so on the call and we will tell you the same thing. It is cheaper for both of us than finding out in month three.
Prefer to talk it through? Ask us on a discovery call →
Where the models differ
The differences that change what you get, rather than adjectives.
- 01
Why taskforces stall at exactly the same point
TenhawWe arrive with a mandate that spans functions and an operating model engagement that changes roles, decision rights and governance. That is the specific work a taskforce structurally cannot do.
Internal taskforceA taskforce is usually staffed part-time by enthusiasts from one or two functions, with no authority to redefine anyone's job. It proves feasibility brilliantly and then hits a wall made of other people's org charts.
- 02
The 30% adoption ceiling
TenhawAdoption plateaus because the people who adopted first were always going to, and everyone else needs their actual role, incentives and measurement to change. That is operating-model work, not enablement or training work.
Internal taskforceThe standard taskforce response is more training and more internal comms, which reliably fails, because the barrier was never awareness.
- 03
Governance arriving late
TenhawGovernance, auditability and human-in-the-loop design are built during operating model design, before scale rather than after an incident. Risk and audit are brought in as designers, not as blockers.
Internal taskforceTaskforces typically ship pilots first and meet the risk function when something goes wrong or when audit notices. The retrofit is far more expensive than designing it in.
Tenhaw and Internal taskforce, dimension by dimension
| Dimension | Tenhaw | Internal taskforce |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | £20k–£55k for a PoC | Effectively free |
| Domain knowledge | Acquired in weeks | Already deep |
| Proves feasibility | Yes | Yes, often faster |
| Can change roles and decision rights | Yes, it is the engagement | No mandate |
| Cross-functional authority | Granted at kickoff | Rarely |
| Governance designed in | Before scale | Usually retrofitted |
| Right first move | Not always | Frequently yes |
Some rows in that table go against us. They stay in it, because a comparison you cannot lose is a comparison nobody should believe.
What a small supplier can evidence
Scale buys an assurance position that clears legal without a conversation. We publish ours in full: what is in place, and what is not yet.
- UK GDPR and Data Protection Act 2018 compliant, as a UK-registered company
- DPA with sub-processor annex available for every engagement
- 24-hour personal data breach notification, committed in the Data Processing Agreement
- UK data processing by default, with EU residency available where an engagement requires it
- Engagement sub-processor list published on the security page and annexed to the DPA
- BS7858-standard personnel screening before client access
- No-substitution commitment written into the SOW: the people on an engagement are not changed without the client's written agreement
- Named-tool-only policy for AI systems touching client data
- Professional indemnity £1m, employers' liability £10m, public liability £1m, cyber £25k, legal expenses £100k
- Cyber Essentials Plus: certification in progress
- ISO 27001: gap assessment complete, certification targeted for 2027
- ISO/IEC 42001 (AI management systems), under assessment, and increasingly the one clients ask for
- SOC 2 Type II: will follow ISO 27001 where clients require it
If your supplier floor requires certification we do not hold today, that is a real reason to buy elsewhere. The full position, including the DPA and the sub-processor annex, is on the security page.
Questions buyers ask us
Why do internal AI taskforces stall?
Because scaling an agent pilot requires changing roles, decision rights and governance across functions the taskforce has no authority over. A taskforce is typically staffed part-time by enthusiasts from one or two teams. It can prove agents work; it cannot redefine other people's jobs, and that is what scaling actually requires.
Why does AI adoption plateau around 30%?
The first third adopt because they were always going to, they are curious and self-directed. Everyone else adopts only when their actual role, incentives and measurement change to assume the new way of working. More training does not move this number because awareness was never the constraint.
Should we run an internal taskforce before hiring a consultancy?
Usually yes. A taskforce is cheap, fast, and discovers real friction points better than any external party. Run it, learn what agents can do in your context, and bring in outside help at the point where scaling requires authority the taskforce does not have. Engaging a consultancy before that point tends to buy analysis you could have generated yourselves.
How do we know when to bring in outside help?
The reliable signals are: pilots succeeded but did not spread; adoption plateaued and more enablement is not moving it; different functions are building incompatible things; or risk and audit have started asking questions nobody can answer. Any two of those together mean the constraint has moved from capability to operating model.
The other options you are weighing
Build it, buy it, or have someone build it with you
Every comparison in this section assumes you should be buying a supplier at all. If the workflow is not differentiated, the answer is a product and none of these pages apply. Three routes, what each is best at, and the four questions that settle it.
Buy the product when being average at this workflow would cost you nothing. Build it yourself when the workflow is part of how you compete and you already have engineers who can carry evaluation, monitoring and model upgrades as a standing job rather than a project.
Tenhaw vs Big Four
Same ambition. Very different delivery model.
Tenhaw vs AI boutiques
Most are strategy firms or build shops. We are neither.
Tenhaw vs Offshore partners
Cheaper per head, and that is the point of it.
Tenhaw vs Contractors
Cheaper per day, and right whenever you already have someone to direct them.
Tenhaw vs Hiring in-house
You should hire. The question is what happens in the meantime.
How to put this to your board
Four things you can lift straight into a paper. None of them is an adjective, and every one of them is published on this site before you ask for it.
- 01
The price is published before the first conversation
£30,000 to £90,000 fixed for the Agent-Readiness Audit, against the £150,000 to £500,000 a large firm typically prices an equivalent assessment at. The rate card behind our figure, and the large firms' own published framework rates, are on the pricing page, so the arithmetic can be checked. - 02
The engagement is contracted to end, and to leave a permanent team behind
The exit date is agreed at kickoff rather than negotiated at the end, recruiting your permanent team is a stated deliverable, and you own all work product and code on payment. - 03
The people are senior, screened and not substitutable
Everyone on the engagement is someone James Rooney has already delivered alongside, screened to BS7858 standard before any client access, and not substituted without your written agreement. A squad of three, so the people you meet are the whole team rather than the top of a pyramid. - 04
The assurance position is published, including what is not yet held
Professional indemnity £1m, employers' liability £10m, public liability £1m, cyber £25k, legal expenses £100k, with certificates shared during onboarding. Cover levels can be increased for a specific engagement where your supplier standard requires it. Raise it on the first call and we will price the increase into the engagement. Cyber Essentials Plus is in progress and ISO 27001 is targeted for 2027. The full position is on the security page.
Board optics is the one row in the triage table where we do not come out ahead. Ours requires a case, which is why the case is written down here rather than assembled on a call.
Let's talk about where your organisation is headed.
A 30-minute discovery call with James Rooney. We'll cover where your organisation sits on the agentic curve and which rung to start on. You'll leave with a rough scope whether you engage us or not.
Most organisations start with a fixed-price Agent-Readiness Audit · £30k–£90k · 6–8 weeks