Skip to main content

Cloud consulting

Choose the boundary before the provider.

Werkon turns a cloud question into a reviewable decision record. Current workload evidence, provider and consumer responsibilities, service options, migration states, security, recovery, financial behavior, skills, dependence, and exit are compared before a target architecture is approved.

Decision contract

Make the current state and option set independently reviewable.

The contract begins with the workload and the decision it supports, not a target provider. Each option is compared against the same functional, operational, security, privacy, resilience, financial, transition, ownership, and exit requirements.

Inputs

Outcome and current baseline
Users, business outcomes, service measures, current applications and data, incidents, delivery time, performance, capacity, availability, recovery, security findings, support effort, costs, contracts, lifecycle deadlines, and the consequence of no change.
Workload and dependency evidence
Components, interfaces, identities, transactions, data sensitivity and residency, volumes, rates, latency, concurrency, batch windows, external services, network paths, devices, licenses, environments, backups, integrations, reports, owners, and change coupling.
Requirements and constraints
Functional behavior, service objectives, recovery point and time, security, privacy, assurance, access, audit, portability, interoperability, regions, procurement, support, skills, delivery, maintenance windows, budget, forecast, allocation, sustainability, commitments, and exit needs.
Options and decision context
Retain, repair, retire, replace, rehost, replatform, refactor, rebuild, service and deployment models, providers, regions, managed services, target architectures, transition states, incentives, credits, commercial terms, risks, assumptions, approvers, and review dates.

Outputs

Workload and responsibility map
A provider-neutral view of users, components, data, dependencies, service boundaries, current pain, provider duties, consumer duties, shared controls, owners, costs, recovery, contracts, lifecycle, and evidence gaps.
Comparable option set
Viable retain, replace, migrate, modernize, and retire options described through the same requirements, service and deployment model, provider dependence, architecture, security, resilience, operation, financial model, transition, exit, assumptions, and disqualifiers.
Decision evidence pack
Measured baseline, architecture and responsibility views, bounded proof results, risk and control gaps, migration and coexistence implications, financial scenarios, sensitivity, skill and support needs, portability and exit tests, residual risk, reviewers, and unresolved questions.
Approved roadmap and review cadence
A decision record with selected and rejected options, rationale, conditions, owners, dependencies, sequencing, foundations, migration waves, acceptance measures, budget and forecast, risk treatment, stop criteria, post-change validation, and reassessment triggers.

Consulting path

Disprove the preferred option before defending it.

The analysis is stronger when viable alternatives face the same evidence and when a preferred provider or architecture can fail a defined requirement. Small proof work should target the uncertain assumptions that could reverse the decision.

  1. 01

    Observe the workload and decision

    Interview owners and users, inspect applications, data, dependencies, environments, incidents, recovery, security, delivery, capacity, usage, contracts, spend, skills, support, and deadlines, then state the decision and consequence of no change.

  2. 02

    Define provider-neutral requirements

    Separate essential outcomes and constraints from inherited implementation choices; assign service, security, privacy, recovery, financial, operational, portability, procurement, skill, lifecycle, and exit requirements with owners and evidence thresholds.

  3. 03

    Build and challenge viable options

    Include retain or repair, replacement, migration, modernization, and retirement where credible; map responsibility and transition states; disclose incentives; and run bounded spikes against uncertain compatibility, performance, security, data, recovery, or cost assumptions.

  4. 04

    Compare full lifecycle evidence

    Evaluate functionality, service, security, privacy, recovery, migration, coexistence, operating skill, provider change, data movement, support, allocation, forecast, commitments, unit cost, residual risk, portability, and exit through common scenarios and sensitivity ranges.

  5. 05

    Decide, sequence, and revisit

    Record the selected and rejected options, rationale, conditions, risk acceptance, owners, foundations, waves, acceptance and stop measures, budget, validation, and review triggers, then compare realized outcomes with the baseline after change.

Placement decision

Keep a non-migration option in the room.

A credible option set includes what happens if the current workload is repaired, replaced, reduced, or retired. Cloud placement earns approval only when its capabilities and responsibility model improve the full system enough to justify transition and operation.

01Cloud placement may not own the constraint

Retain, repair, or retire

Keep or improve the current environment when it meets service, security, recovery, cost, and lifecycle needs with lower transition risk, or retire the workload when its value no longer justifies continued operation.

Evidence: Outcome and usage, current service and risk, lifecycle and support, repair options, recovery proof, capacity, total cost, contractual position, retirement dependencies, archive and deletion, and no-change consequences.

02A product already fits the business capability

Replace with managed software

Consider software as a service when configuration and integration meet the real workflow and the organization accepts provider control over application operation, roadmap, tenancy, data handling, access surfaces, pricing, export, and exit.

Evidence: Functional fit and gaps, configuration limits, identities and permissions, integrations, data model, migration, security and privacy, service and recovery, audit, support, pricing, roadmap, export, deletion, and exit test.

03Placement or managed infrastructure is the main change

Rehost or replatform

Move with limited application change when a lifecycle deadline, capacity constraint, facility exit, recovery need, or useful managed foundation justifies migration and current architecture can operate safely under the new responsibility and cost model.

Evidence: Compatibility, dependencies, identity and network, data transfer, service mapping, licensing, performance, recovery, delivery, monitoring, security, cutover, coexistence, operating model, cost, and later modernization path.

04Managed primitives materially improve the product

Refactor or build cloud-native

Redesign when eventing, managed data, elastic execution, global delivery, automation, or other cloud capabilities improve a named outcome enough to justify application change, distributed failure modes, platform dependence, new skills, and ongoing operation.

Evidence: Product outcome, baseline, target capability, domain and data boundaries, failure model, security, observability, recovery, delivery, performance, scaling, cost drivers, provider limits, skills, portability, staged validation, and stop rule.

Decision controls

Keep assumptions, incentives, and uncertainty visible.

Cloud choices combine technical and commercial uncertainty. Decision quality depends on exposing the evidence range, what would falsify an option, who benefits from the choice, and when changing prices, usage, regulations, provider services, or business needs require review.

Every option uses one requirement set
Compare the same workload, outcome, service, security, recovery, financial, skill, support, transition, portability, and exit requirements. Record disqualifiers and evidence gaps instead of giving the preferred option more favorable assumptions.
Responsibility maps to named controls
For each service, assign provider, consumer, and shared duties across identity, network, configuration, code, data, encryption, logs, monitoring, backup, recovery, incidents, change, support, audit, deletion, and lifecycle with evidence owners.
Financial scenarios include transition and operation
Model usage and growth, data movement, shared services, environments, observability, security, backup, support, licenses, commitments, discounts, idle and burst capacity, migration, parallel run, skills, decommissioning, and sensitivity, then compare unit value as well as total spend.
The decision has an expiry condition
Set review triggers for usage, price, service changes, incidents, security findings, regulations, data residency, performance, capacity, business value, provider roadmap, contract renewal, skill coverage, and exit readiness. Architecture is a maintained decision, not permanent truth.

Engagement fit

Use cloud consulting when a consequential placement or architecture choice remains genuinely open.

Good reason to begin

  • A workload, platform, migration, provider, service model, deployment model, modernization, security, operating model, cost, or exit decision has material consequences and more than one credible option.
  • Business, product, application, data, architecture, security, privacy, risk, finance, procurement, operations, and support owners can provide evidence and make or review the relevant tradeoffs.
  • Current workloads, dependencies, usage, costs, contracts, incidents, recovery evidence, security findings, performance, capacity, skills, and support practices can be inspected at a proportionate depth.
  • The organization is willing to keep retain, repair, replace, and retire options visible, disclose incentives, test uncertain assumptions, record rejected options, and revisit the decision after implementation.

Resolve before beginning

  • Leadership has already mandated a provider or target and only wants a report that retroactively justifies it, while contrary evidence, cost, risk, responsibility, and exit implications cannot affect the decision.
  • The assessment cannot access workload owners, current architecture, data and dependencies, incidents, recovery evidence, costs, contracts, security findings, or operational practices and is expected to infer them from inventory names.
  • Provider credits, referral fees, resale margins, commitments, implementation interests, or commercial relationships could shape the recommendation but cannot be disclosed, governed, or separated from option evaluation.
  • No accountable owner can approve the decision, accept residual risk, fund shared foundations and transition, own post-change operation, validate outcomes, or act if the selected option fails its conditions.

Source basis

Sources behind the control model.

  • 01

    National Institute of Standards and Technology

    Cloud Computing Synopsis and Recommendations

    NIST Special Publication 800-146 provides final, provider-neutral guidance for considering cloud opportunities and risks across service and deployment models, portability, interoperability, security, performance, management, and organizational readiness.

  • 02

    National Institute of Standards and Technology

    NIST Cloud Computing Reference Architecture

    The reference architecture defines consumer, provider, broker, auditor, and carrier roles plus service orchestration, management, security, privacy, contracts, metering, portability, interoperability, and changing responsibility across service models.

  • 03

    FinOps Foundation

    Architecting and Workload Placement

    The current capability connects workload placement and modernization options to business goals, operational requirements, cost and usage transparency, financial viability, second-order effects, transition states, success measures, onboarding, and post-change review.

  • 04

    National Institute of Standards and Technology

    General Access Control Guidance for Cloud Systems

    NIST Special Publication 800-210 explains how access-control responsibilities and control surfaces differ across infrastructure, platform, and software cloud service models, supporting explicit service-by-service responsibility analysis.

[ WORKFLOW / SYSTEMS AUDIT ]
THE FIRST ENGAGEMENT

Start with one real workflow

A Systems Audit is the usual starting point. If the opportunity is already clear, we can move directly into a focused build.

Show Us the WorkflowStart with the free automation readiness checklist

OBSERVEQUANTIFYDECIDEBUILD

Continue with the work

Choose the next useful path.

Stay with the operating question. The technology can wait until the work is clear.

01

Explore cloud services

Place the decision inside the wider foundation, migration, native-development, security, managed-operation, optimization, responsibility, and lifecycle map.

Open path02

Start with a systems audit

Map the operation, applications, data, identities, dependencies, friction, risks, and keep, connect, replace, migrate, build, or retire decision before selecting technology.

Open path03

Modernize through reversible seams

Preserve behavior, data authority, continuity, recovery, and evidence while old and new paths coexist and before the source path is retired.

Open path04

Transfer record authority safely

Inventory, map, transform, validate, reconcile, cut over, recover, stabilize, archive, and retire data under explicit write and acceptance boundaries.

Open path05

Build governed decision views

Turn current workload, usage, service, risk, and financial facts into traceable metrics, comparisons, scenarios, caveats, and accountable decisions.

Open path