Four questions. They set the scale we compare your spend against — a five-person office and a twelve-location operator are not the same audit.
List the software and services your business pays for. Rough numbers are fine — we are looking for the shape of your spend, not your invoices. Skip anything you do not know.
Have a list already? Paste it and we will turn each line into a row.
Nothing added yet. Start with the systems you know you pay for — the rest can wait.
A list of subscriptions says what you buy. These eight say how it actually works day to day — which is where most of the opportunity lives. “Not sure” is a real answer and it costs you nothing.
Everything below is built from what you entered. We are not comparing you to a database of other companies - we do not have one, and a number from someone else's business would not tell you anything. Every band and every range traces back to an answer you gave, and we show you which one.
You did not enter costs, so there is no breakdown to show. We can still talk through the systems you listed.
Each band is driven by an answer you gave. Nothing here is a stock percentage.
From what you have told us, we do not see a meaningful opportunity to reduce your technology spend. That is a good outcome, and we would rather say so than manufacture one.
This is a preliminary assessment based solely on the information you provided. It is not a guaranteed savings estimate. A proper review of your licenses, contracts, workflows and systems is required before we can make specific recommendations — and if that review finds nothing meaningful, we will tell you so.
None of these is a verdict. They are the questions we would bring to the table - and the reason each one is here is sitting right beside it.
You indicated that some subscriptions may not be actively used. A utilization review across the licenses you listed usually finds seats that can be reduced, reassigned, or moved to a cheaper tier — without anyone losing a tool they actually open.
More than one of your categories holds several systems doing broadly similar work. That is normal — it is how estates grow. It is also the most common place to remove a subscription without removing a capability.
Renewals that pass unexamined tend to drift upward. Going through the contracts with fresh eyes before the next renewal window is the cheapest work on this list, and it is work you could do without us.
External IT support and infrastructure make up a large share of your technology spend. That is not by itself a problem, but it is the line most worth understanding in detail — what it covers, what it does not, and what has quietly been added over the years.
You told us employees regularly move information between applications by hand. Connecting those systems does not usually cut a bill — it gives people back hours, and removes the errors that come from typing the same number twice. We have deliberately kept this out of the money range above.
Management information currently appears to come from several places at once. Consolidating the operational data usually reduces the effort of putting a number together and, more usefully, makes it the same number wherever it is read.
Your answers do not point at an obvious problem. Your application count is reasonable for your size, your systems appear to talk to each other, and your spending has been reviewed recently. We would still be glad to look properly, but we would go in expecting to confirm what you already have rather than change it.
Nothing appears above that one of your own answers did not put there. If your answers had not pointed at anything, this list would be empty - and we would have told you that instead.
The audit gives us a starting point. The next step is sitting down with you, understanding how the business actually runs, validating these numbers against real invoices, and showing you exactly what we would change — and what we would leave alone.
We do not make money by making technology complicated.
Our job is to look at what you already have, keep what works, remove what does not, connect what should be talking, and build something new only where it earns its place.
If we cannot show you a lower technology cost, a materially better way of operating, or preferably both — there is nothing for us to sell you.
We do not want our incentives tied to how long we spend in your building.
The goal is not to manufacture a large implementation project out of a small problem.
If a system works and the economics make sense, it stays. We connect it instead.
If we cannot demonstrate one of the two, we will say so — and that is a perfectly good outcome of a first meeting.
One product per line. We work out what each one is.
We work out the category from the product name.
Not sure? Leave it blank — we will still count the system, just not the spend.