A small senior team that takes on technology leadership, builds the software the market does not sell, and points AI at the work that eats your week. Fixed fee, written commitments, a documented exit.
The two look similar from the outside and need opposite things. Pick the one that describes your week.
10 to 150 people, no internal IT function
We take on the technology decisions and build the tools, at a fixed fee, without you hiring anyone. And we hand it back documented.
100+ people, an IT department already in place
Senior reinforcement on a bounded scope, with the exit written into the mandate before it starts.
Some of our clients
Plus twelve engagements not disclosed publicly
Several of these clients are public institutions, which means the engagements are a matter of record rather than a claim you have to take on trust.
French government development agency
Cameroon needed sovereign digital addressing infrastructure, and no off-the-shelf product existed. We built it, put it in production, trained three local developers, and handed over the sources so the country could host it itself.
Read the case studiesInfrastructure modernization inside corporate IT, wave after wave, never a single high-risk cutover.
A citizen reporting platform across 24 towns for a tramway construction programme.
Field inspection tooling whose statistics are used by the French Ministry of Agriculture.
We build the tools. We carry the risk. We measure the value.
The details are written in the contract. Not in a slide.
Not a values statement. Four operational commitments that appear in the engagement letter, which is the only place a commitment counts.
We sell a deliverable, not days. Which means an estimate that turns out wrong is our problem, not a change order. Where a procurement framework only admits time and materials, we adapt, with a written cap and a defined exit.
Contractual commitment on scope, schedule, quality and no data loss. If data is lost through something we did, restoring it is at our expense.
Source code, content, credentials. Not a licence to use it. Ownership, on delivery and payment in full.
Documentation, one of your people trained, a documented handover. Written into the engagement, not offered as a favour at the end.
Because a day rate makes a slipping project your problem, and a fixed fee makes it ours. It also stopped meaning much: with modern tooling, the same work can take two days or two weeks depending on how it is approached, which makes a billed day an arbitrary unit of value. A deliverable stays stable and verifiable. Practically, it changes the conversation about a new request: the question becomes whether it is in the signed scope, not how many days it adds.
Everything transfers: source code, documentation, accounts, credentials, and a decision log explaining why each significant call was made. One person on your side is trained during the engagement rather than in the final week, because knowledge builds alongside the system. On the day we leave, you can run it without us, and that is the point.
Paris is six hours ahead of the US East Coast and nine ahead of the West Coast, so our afternoon is your morning. That overlap is real working time rather than a courtesy window, and it is when standups and decision calls happen. The cost is that a late-afternoon question on your side is answered the next morning. For work that needs someone reachable at 4pm Pacific for operational incidents, a provider on your timezone is the better answer, and we will say so.
Not yet, and pretending otherwise would be a poor start. The work travels: infrastructure modernization, interim technology leadership and custom software are not jurisdiction-specific, and one of these engagements delivered national infrastructure on another continent. What we do not have is a US client list, and if that is a requirement for you then we are not the right fit for this project.
Describe what is happening on your side. We will say plainly whether we can help, and if an internal hire or a provider on your timezone would serve you better, we will say that instead.
