I help founders, investors, boards, and portfolio companies assess technology assets and AI economics, quantify build and run costs, expose the conditions and risks that matter, and leave with an executable plan for the next decision.
For founders · investors · boards · portfolio companies
20+ years across systems engineering, cloud, DevOps/SRE, enterprise architecture, AI/data platforms, and technology leadership.
What should we build, buy, or validate first—and what team, architecture, time, and budget will it require?
Can AI automate this workflow safely and economically—and where should human control remain?
Does the technology asset support the business or investment thesis—and what will the next maturity step cost?
Use these services when a persuasive idea, prototype, or plan still lacks an evidence-based path to a reliable outcome.
Specialist modules: AI & Platform Productization · Transaction & Fundraising Technology Readiness
Could AI agents perform this workflow reliably, safely and economically, or would conventional automation work better?
I analyse the workflow, data, decisions, integrations and failure costs to determine:
Everything an executive team needs to decide whether, where and how to deploy agents, and what must be proven before scaling.
Depending on scope, the engagement produces the artefacts an executive team can act on—grounded in cost, ownership, and execution rather than detached from them.
The output is a decision package that executives can act on—not a recommendation deck detached from cost, ownership, and execution.
Define the business outcome, materiality, deadline, stakeholders, known constraints, and evidence available.
Review systems, architecture, costs, workflows, plans, delivery evidence, and accountable owners.
Model alternatives, dependencies, economics, risks, confidence ranges, and the consequences of doing nothing.
Document the selected option, decision owner, assumptions, gates, and executable next-step plan.
Implementation or interim leadership can follow under a separate scope. An assessment creates no hidden obligation to retain me for delivery.
Meet first, work through a specific question, or request a deeper assessment. Start at the stage that fits — each engagement has its own useful outcome, and you can stop after any step and use the work independently.
30 minutes · Free · An intro meeting or quick feedback
Get a fresh perspective on your idea, plan, or technical decision. Bring one question, and we’ll explore what looks promising, which assumptions deserve a closer look, and what you could do next.
You’ll leave with honest initial feedback and a clearer sense of direction.
No deck needed — just bring the question on your mind. No commitment to further work.
90 minutes · $350
Bring an idea, a difficult technical choice, or a concern about how your product is being built. We’ll work through it together and identify a practical way forward.
What you’ll get
A written recap within one business day
Two pages you can forward to your team or board: the decision question, an initial recommendation, the routes considered with their trade-offs, what remains unverified, the economics behind the answer, and a bounded next step with owners and limits.
Sample recap · PDF · 2 pages · illustrative scenario
Open the sample recap
PDFRecommended when you need to clarify the direction. Includes light preparation and a written brief within one business day. Deeper investigation and detailed calculations are scoped separately.
From $1,500 · Fixed scope agreed upfront
When a decision needs investigation, I review the relevant material and prepare a written assessment you can use with your team or stakeholders.
Starting scope: one clearly defined question. Deliverables, fee, and timing are agreed before work begins.
Custom proposal
Work with a technical partner who stays close to your context as decisions evolve. I can advise between milestones, help your team put a plan into practice, or take on a defined technology leadership role.
We agree the objective, responsibilities, capacity, and terms before starting, and review the arrangement as your needs change.
Already know what you need? We can start there. A paid session is never required before a project or ongoing engagement.
Start with a conversation. Continue with a focused assessment, a delivery plan, or hands-on support when you need it. Each engagement has its own useful outcome, and you can start at the stage that fits.
Can this work, and which approach makes sense?
Compare a custom build, existing products, integration, and a narrower first version against your constraints.
You get: A comparison of the viable options, dependencies, evidence gaps, and a recommended next step. That may be a build, a purchase, a smaller test, or a decision to defer.
Turn an approach into something you can evaluate.
Translate a promising direction into an architecture outline and an estimate of what it would take to build and operate.
You get: A technical hypothesis, key components and integrations, the assumptions to test, and cost ranges for development and ongoing operation over an agreed period. The model shows what changes with scope, volume, and service requirements.
Could you agentify it?
Find out which parts of a workflow are suitable for AI, where simpler automation is enough, and where people should stay involved.
You get: A workflow map, proposed automation boundaries, quality criteria, and a cost comparison with the current process. The estimate includes implementation, integrations, model usage, human review, and maintenance. When reliability is unproven, we define a focused evaluation before committing to rollout.
Check the uncertainty that could change the decision.
When research and estimates cannot answer the key question, we scope a small technical experiment with a clear success criterion.
You get: Agreed test conditions, observations, and an updated recommendation. A prototype or benchmark is included only when it is part of the agreed scope.
Make the next stage executable.
Turn a chosen direction into a delivery plan that reflects your team, budget, and dependencies.
You get: A phased scope, priorities, milestones, required roles, budget ranges, and explicit dependencies. You’ll see what your current team can cover and where hiring, specialist help, or a smaller scope is needed.
Need help putting the plan into practice?
I can support your existing team, help select and coordinate delivery partners, or take an interim CTO role with agreed responsibilities and decision authority.
You get: We agree the outcome, responsibilities, capacity, and handover before work begins. You can also take the plan and implement it independently.
We’ll choose the right depth of work for your question before you commit.
Tell me what you’re trying to achieve. We’ll choose a useful first step together.
Email: stanislav.tretyakov.p@gmail.comTelegram: +381 62 941 1915WhatsApp: +381 62 941 1915LinkedIn: stanislav-t
No. I can provide an independent assessment, support a defined decision, or temporarily own an agreed mandate. The goal is clarity and controlled capability transfer, not permanent dependency.
No credible assessment can do that before the scope, dependencies, baseline, and evidence are known. I provide ranges, assumptions, confidence levels, sensitivities, and decision gates so uncertainty can be managed rather than hidden.
Yes, when the mandate, decision rights, capacity, success measures, and commercial terms are explicit. Implementation is contracted separately.
CTO Field Notes
Early technical decisions shape the options a business will have later. I look at the cost of building a solution, operating it, and changing direction when the evidence changes. These notes explore the decisions that connect technology, customers and capital.
An early shortcut can become a commitment across your architecture, customer promises and team. How do you keep the next decision affordable?
Architecture, automation, and technology leadership — connecting technical decisions to product and business priorities.
I’ve worked as an architect with large engineering teams across startup products and enterprise technology portfolios, contributing to projects for Wolters Kluwer, Chevron, Lloyd’s of London, Swiss Re, Paysend, and UBS.
That breadth helps me find approaches suited to your stage and constraints — from a focused first release to complex integrations and systems that need to evolve across teams and products.
Deep, hands-on expertise across DevOps, SRE, platform architecture, and agentic AI workflow design — covering how software is built, delivered, and operated.
I help identify where automation can make a meaningful difference, what reliable implementation requires, and how to balance speed, operating costs, and human oversight. The goal is a system your team can run and improve as the business grows.
Experience leading technology functions and large engineering teams with a product-first mindset — shaping operating models, planning resources, hiring leaders and specialists, and aligning delivery with business priorities.
I help turn product ambition into clear responsibilities, realistic plans, and a team structure equipped to execute them — with visibility into capacity, dependencies, and the decisions that need leadership attention.
Portfolio and selected project details available on request.
Independent technology assessment · AI automation economics · Technical due diligence support · Interim/Fractional CTO
Email: stanislav.tretyakov.p@gmail.comTelegram: +381 62 941 1915WhatsApp: +381 62 941 1915LinkedIn: stanislav-t
Privacy: Contact details are used only to respond to your inquiry. Do not submit confidential source code, credentials, personal datasets, or data-room access through the public contact channel.