EXEQSOLUTIONS

EXECUTION AUDITS FOR SOFTWARE COMPANIES

Your engineers are fine. Your execution chain leaks.

Most software teams don't have a talent problem. They have execution leaks: vague tickets, drifting specs, rework nobody logs. AI tooling multiplies whatever discipline already exists, including the lack of it.

We go inside your engineering org from the outside. We read the real tickets, specs, planning docs, and release notes, interview the people who write them, and map where work loses value between requirements and support.

Take the scorecardRequest the audit

THE CHAIN

Work leaks at the joints, not inside the boxes.

Software work moves through six stations. The value gets lost between them. We read the real artifacts at every joint and mark what leaks.

  1. REQREQUIREMENTS
    LK-01

    Vague tickets

    The requirement said what to build and why. The ticket says less. Engineers fill the gap with guesses, the guesses ship, and the gap becomes rework.

  2. TKTTICKETS
    LK-02

    Spec drift

    The spec was true at kickoff. Three weeks of decisions later, nobody has updated it. The code and the document now describe different products, and every new hire inherits the confusion.

  3. ENGENGINEERING
    LK-03

    Silent rework

    Work gets redone because the first version answered the wrong question. The redo never gets a ticket, so it never shows up in planning, velocity, or anyone's forecast.

  4. RELRELEASE
    LK-04

    Release notes nobody can use

    Engineering writes the changelog for engineering. Sales and marketing can't sell from it, so they keep selling the previous version of the product.

  5. GTMGTM
    LK-05

    Findings that never return

    Support hears what's broken every day. Those findings die in a queue and never reach product. The same leak gets reported again next quarter, at full cost.

  6. SUPSUPPORT
  7. RETURN PATH FROM SUPPORT TO REQUIREMENTS: BROKEN

THE AUDIT

Four weeks inside how you actually run.

Every org has two versions of itself: the one in the process docs and the one in the tickets. We audit the second one.

DURATION
Four weeks. Fixed scope, fixed price, fixed end date.
COVERAGE
The whole chain. Requirements, tickets, engineering, release, GTM, support.
METHOD
Async first. We read your real tickets, specs, planning docs, and release notes. Then 4 to 5 interviews with the people who write them.
LOAD ON YOUR TEAM
Almost none. Most of the audit happens in your artifacts, not your calendar.
POSITION
Outside. We report to no one in your org chart, so we can write down what the org chart can't.
DELIVERABLES
A findings report with named leaks and conservative cost estimates. A 90-day plan sequenced for how your team actually works. A plan, not a framework.

THE LADDER

Four steps. Each one earns the next.

  1. STEP 01FREE

    The scorecard

    Twelve questions about how work moves through your chain, scored against the leaks we find most often. Five minutes, no call.

    Take the scorecard
  2. STEP 02[PRICE]

    The audit

    Four weeks across the whole chain. You get the findings report and the 90-day plan described above.

    Request the audit
  3. STEP 03

    The install

    We implement the plan as a working system: ticket standards, spec templates, AI review gates. Scoped after the audit, because the audit decides what gets installed.

  4. STEP 04

    The checkup

    A quarterly retainer. We re-read the artifacts, measure drift against the plan, and tell you what started leaking again.

THE PRICE IS PUBLIC AND THE SCOPE IS FIXED BECAUSE AUDITS GO WRONG WHEN EITHER ONE IS NEGOTIABLE.

READOUT

[STAT-1]

[STAT-1 CAPTION: WHAT IT MEASURES AND ITS SOURCE]

[STAT-2]

[STAT-2 CAPTION: WHAT IT MEASURES AND ITS SOURCE]

CONTACT

Request the audit.

Tell us where you suspect the chain leaks. We reply within two business days with whether the audit fits and when we can start.

Prefer email? Write to [EMAIL].