Most engagements begin with a diagnostic phase.

This allows us to step back and understand:

• How marketing is currently executing
• How systems and reporting are connected
• Where clarity is breaking down
• What decisions leadership is struggling to make

From there, we determine whether a project-based engagement, fractional support, or short advisory retainer makes the most sense. The structure is driven by what will be most useful — not a preset package.

Either — depending on the need.

Some organizations benefit from a defined project (for example, a marketing execution or systems review). Others need ongoing advisory support during a period of growth, change, or complexity.

What stays consistent is the nature of the work:

• Diagnostic
• Advisory
• Focused on clarity and decision-making

The structure supports the work — not the other way around.

No.

All work is scope-based and clearly defined upfront.
You’ll always know:

• What the engagement includes
• Defined outcomes we’re working toward
• Deliverables to expect

This ensures transparency and avoids the uncertainty that comes with hourly billing.

Deliverables vary by engagement, but typically include:

• A clear summary of findings
• Articulation of where clarity is breaking down
• Prioritized recommendations
• Guidance on what to fix, what to ignore, and what to address next

The emphasis is on decision-ready insight, not long decks or unnecessary documentation.

This work is most valuable when:

• Marketing spend is meaningful
• Execution is active
• Leadership feels pressure to “fix something”
• Clarity is missing despite effort

You’re not hiring for execution or analysis alone.
You’re hiring for judgment — someone who understands marketing, systems, and operations well enough to help you decide what actually matters.

Hiring an employee makes sense when you need:

• day-to-day ownership

• long-term execution

• a permanent role

This work is different.

A consultant provides:

• An independent perspective
• Senior-level experience without long-term commitment
• Focused, time-bound support
• Freedom from internal politics

Many organizations use this work to clarify what they need before making a permanent hire.

No.

This work is designed to support teams and partners, not replace them.

In many cases, it helps organizations:

• Use agencies more effectively
• Reduce internal friction
• Create clearer ownership and expectations

Only when necessary — and never as a default.

Often, the issue isn’t missing tools but:

• Unclear use
• Poor connection between systems
• Misaligned expectations

The goal is always to reduce unnecessary complexity, not add to it.

Yes — but thoughtfully.

I help teams evaluate automation and AI in the context of:

• Readiness
• Risk
• Actual impact

The focus is on what’s useful now, what’s premature, and what’s simply noise.

This work is best suited for:

• Small and midsize businesses (20+ employees)
• Organizations with active marketing efforts
• Leadership teams seeking clarity, not tactics

It’s not a fit for:

• Solopreneurs
• Early-stage startups
• Organizations looking for execution or campaign management

The easiest way is a conversation.

A short discussion can quickly clarify:

• Where clarity is breaking down
• Whether this type of support would be useful
• What an engagement could look like

If it’s not the right fit, I’ll say so.