AI Readiness Audit

An AI readiness audit helps an organisation decide where AI could create useful, measurable value and what would need to change to achieve it. It examines the work, the available data, the risks and the support people need.

Tenhaw's audit covers product, internal processes, operations and software delivery. Over four weeks, we build two or three working prototypes with your team and turn the findings into a sequenced, costed plan. The fixed fee is £44,000, excluding VAT.

Four connected areas: the product your customers use, the internal processes that run the business, operations and software delivery. We follow real workflows with the people who know them, review the data and examine the tools already in use.

That might mean exploring how a customer finds an answer, how a team gathers information for a decision, or how engineers test a change. We compare opportunities within and across the four areas so your board can decide where to invest first.

Tenhaw's AI Readiness Audit costs £44,000 fixed for an agreed four-week scope, excluding VAT. We agree the business areas, access and two or three prototype workflows before work starts. Organisation size shapes where we focus the four weeks; it does not create a different price band.

Pre-agreed expenses are charged at cost, and model and platform use sits on your own accounts. The fee covers the agreed deliverables. If you request a scope change, we agree it and any fee or timeline changes in writing before the additional work starts. When comparing assessments, check the deliverables, engineering time and client involvement as well as the fee.

Choose the audit when you need to decide where to invest across the organisation. It explores four areas, tests two or three candidates and gives your board a costed plan.

A proof of concept fits when you already have one workflow in mind and want to find out whether the approach works. It costs £20,000–£55,000 fixed over two to four weeks, excluding VAT. Your team can use either engagement to learn before committing to a production build.

James Rooney leads every audit personally, supported by a senior operator and a build engineer. The operator explores workflows with your teams; the engineer pairs with your engineers to build and test the prototypes.

The fee is based on five partner days, twenty operator days and nine engineer days across the four weeks. Associates come through work James knows at first hand or referrals from people he has delivered with. Everyone completes BS7858-standard screening before client access, with written confidentiality and data-handling terms. Your Statement of Work names the people and their responsibilities.

It depends on the decision you need to make. If you need permanent leadership, the hire matters. An audit can help define that role by establishing the opportunities, constraints and investment priorities they would inherit.

If your Head of AI is already in post, we can work with them over the four weeks to test their priorities and develop the plan with your teams. The audit provides evidence and delivery support while responsibility for the permanent role remains with your organisation.

The agreed four weeks of work: two or three working prototypes, a heat map across the four domains, a constraint register, a decision inventory, an assessment of people and adoption, and an investment case. You also receive estimated running costs and a plan in three-month increments, capped at twelve months, presented to your leadership.

Code is built in your repositories, and you own the deliverables on payment of the applicable fees. VAT, pre-agreed expenses at cost and model or platform use on your accounts are separate. The fee is fixed for the agreed scope; client-requested changes are agreed in writing before additional work begins.

It can help you decide what to keep, improve, consolidate or retire. We map the tools people use, including informal use, to the workflows they support. Your colleagues can explain why they chose them, what helps and where they still have to work around a limitation.

We examine overlap and running costs alongside the opportunities for new work. The plan records the recommended changes and their reasons. Tenhaw does not sell software licences.

Two or three working prototypes and the evidence to decide what to do next. Each prototype runs against your real data in your tenancy, with measured accuracy, an assessment of confidence in the results and an estimated run cost per unit of work.

The written readout covers opportunities, constraints, decisions, people and adoption, the investment case and candidates to leave out. A costed plan sets out the next steps in three-month increments, capped at twelve months. Preparing a prototype for production is a separate scope.

We trace the data a real workflow needs: where it lives, who can access it, how complete it is and whether an answer can be checked against its source. Your teams help us find the exceptions and dependencies.

The prototypes then test those conditions in practice. We examine retrieval quality, missing context, permissions and links back to the source, and record what would need to improve before relying on the workflow. Findings apply to the data and workflows examined, with wider questions recorded for follow-up.

We compare the possible benefit with the data, risk, effort and running costs involved. Some candidates have too little volume to justify a build. Others need better information, a different process or a decision that should remain with a person.

Your team's examples help us understand which constraint matters. We record candidates to defer or stop with a reason, so you can revisit them if circumstances change. A simpler process improvement may be the useful outcome.

The people doing the work and engineers who can pair on the prototypes are central. Their examples, judgement and feedback help us choose and test the candidates. We also need an executive sponsor empowered to decide within the agreed scope, the platform or data owner, and someone from risk to agree the classification and controls before prototyping.

Finance helps examine the cost baseline and investment assumptions. We agree the people, access and time needed during scoping so each team can plan its contribution.

We record volume, elapsed time, people involved and rework for the workflow as it runs today, then work with your team to express that baseline in currency. Finance can check the assumptions and the value assigned to people's time.

Prototype results and estimated model and platform costs help us explore potential improvements against that baseline. Time released is capacity; it becomes a cash saving only if expenditure changes. The audit estimates the opportunity, while realised savings need to be measured after adoption in live work.

We establish where the data may go, who may access it and which actions the prototype is allowed to take. That includes identity and access controls, scoped permissions, approved locations for model inference, data-handling requirements and the evidence your risk team needs.

The prototypes run in your tenancy on your contracts, within the controls agreed with your platform and risk owners. Those colleagues help us identify what can be tested and what needs another decision before work proceeds.

It can show how your engineers work with the approach on the selected workflows, and where further support would help. We review how software is delivered today and pair with your engineers while building the prototypes.

That gives us practical evidence about requirements, implementation, testing and review. Their feedback helps identify useful changes to tools and working practices. Four weeks provides a view of the work examined, which you can use to plan further learning and delivery.

Compare the scope you need with the people and deliverables in each proposal. Tenhaw's audit is a four-week engagement at £44,000 excluding VAT, with James Rooney, a senior operator and a build engineer contributing an agreed allocation of time. It includes prototypes built with your engineers and a costed investment plan.

A larger firm may suit a broader international programme or a need for several specialist disciplines. Ask each supplier what it will test, what your team receives, who does the work and what involvement it needs from you. Our pricing page provides the rate card and published framework comparisons for context.

Prototyping is part of the agreed scope, with an engineer allocated to build it. During weeks two and three, our engineer pairs with yours on two or three workflows using your real data and repositories.

The tests and your team's feedback inform the plan presented in week four. You can inspect the code and results as they develop, and you own the deliverables on payment even if the audit is the only engagement you buy.

The audit helps you make a better investment decision. It can identify a promising workflow, expose a costly dependency or show why a proposed build should stop. The value of that decision depends on the work and spend under consideration; we do not promise a financial return from the audit.

You receive a cost baseline, prototype measurements, running-cost estimates and a plan with assumptions your finance team can examine. Together, those give you a way to judge the next investment before making it.

Yes, as an operational assessment scoped to the target or business unit, at the same £44,000 fixed fee over four weeks, excluding VAT. We examine the work, systems, evidence of value and dependencies within the agreed scope.

Access to the people doing the work, engineers and relevant data is needed for the prototypes. We check whether that involvement is practical within your transaction timetable before you commit. Legal, financial and regulatory due diligence remain separate specialist work.

Tenhaw's service was originally called an Agent Readiness Audit. It now covers AI opportunities more broadly across product, internal processes, operations and software delivery. An agent is one possible approach to a workflow.

The agent-specific work remains in the decision inventory: what a system could act on, what a person should decide, and how consequences and reversibility shape that choice. The engagement runs four weeks at £44,000 fixed, excluding VAT, and tests two or three candidates as working prototypes.

Yes. We can examine the workflows, assumptions and proposed investment alongside your team and supplier. We agree access, responsibilities and scheduling before starting, including how to avoid disrupting ongoing work.

The audit tests two or three candidate workflows and compares the findings with expected value, feasibility and running costs. Your board receives a costed plan and recommendations about what to continue, change or stop. Tenhaw does not sell licences, and you can take the findings forward with your existing supplier.

The engagement ends after the agreed four weeks. Nothing renews automatically. You have the prototype code in your repositories, the written findings and a costed plan with review points. You own the deliverables on payment of the applicable fees.

Your team can take the plan forward, use another supplier or agree further work with Tenhaw. That could mean a focused proof of concept, operating-model design, a production build or programme support. Each is a separate scope, and a decision to stop is also a valid next step.

There is no single weekly allowance: it depends on the workflows, access arrangements and number of engineers pairing with us. We agree the expected involvement before you commit so your teams can make room for it.

Week one needs colleagues to walk through their work and help us understand the data. Weeks two and three need engineering time for pairing and colleagues to review prototype results. Week four needs the relevant leaders, with finance and risk input, to examine the findings and decide what follows.

Both. You receive a written readout in seven sections and a session with your leadership in week four. We show the prototypes, explain the findings and work through the investment choices with you.

Bring the people who will own the decisions, alongside the finance and risk colleagues whose input the plan needs. They can examine the assumptions, ask about difficult cases and agree which questions still need answering.

Each placement names its evidence. We rank the workflows examined by expected return and feasibility, using the workflow observations, available data, constraints and prototype results.

The two or three prototyped candidates have measured accuracy and an assessment of confidence in the results. Other candidates may have less direct evidence, which is made clear. Your team can see why a workflow sits where it does and which assumption or test could change its position.

Four weeks can answer a useful, bounded set of questions in a large organisation. Before starting, we agree which business areas and workflows to examine across the four domains and which two or three candidates to prototype.

It is not an exhaustive assessment of every operating company at once. We use the scoping conversation to establish whether the questions that matter can be answered within the time available. If they cannot, we say so before you commit and discuss a more focused starting point.

That is a useful part of the readout. Each value is stated in currency with the assumptions, confidence and arithmetic available for review. Your finance team can change the inputs and see how the case changes.

James Rooney leads the audit personally and can explain how the findings support the recommendation. The prototype results are there to examine too. A challenged assumption may change the order of investment or identify the next thing to test.

Yes. The fee pays for the agreed assessment, prototypes and findings, including a recommendation to stop where the evidence supports it. You retain the written findings and own the deliverables on payment, whether or not you proceed.

A stop recommendation may apply to one workflow while others remain worth pursuing. The readout explains the reasons and the conditions that would justify revisiting the decision.

Some assumptions may need refreshing. The plan marks review points within its three-month increments, capped at twelve months, so you can check what has changed before funding the next stage.

Model pricing, platform costs, data access, business volumes and team capacity can all affect the case. Your team can revisit those inputs alongside the baseline and constraints recorded during the audit. The age of the plan matters less than whether its assumptions still fit the work.

Model inference, compute and other platform use are charged on your own accounts during and after the audit. Those costs are separate from the £44,000 fee. You control the prototypes in your tenancy and can switch them off when you choose.

The audit includes an estimated run cost per unit of work for each candidate. Costs at production volume depend on the workload and the additional controls, monitoring and support needed for live use, so the prototype estimate is a starting point for that budget.

No. They are built to test the selected workflows against your real data and provide evidence for an investment decision. A production system needs a separately agreed scope for hardening, assurance and operation.

Your engineers can build on the code in your repositories. The costed plan identifies the build work, dependencies and estimated costs involved in taking it forward, including the volumes and error tolerance the workflow needs to support.