Software engineering consulting for products that already have constraints

For founders and CTOs who need a senior engineer on a messy product call.

Senior engineering judgement for companies that need a principal-level partner, not a staffed agency team.

You leave with

Diagnosis, then working software

A written diagnosis of the constraint, the options, and the recommendation.
Architecture and interface contracts the team can implement against.
Working software in production, not a prototype that dies in a staging URL.
Observability, failure modes, and a human fallback where the path is probabilistic.
A handover the internal team can operate without me in the loop.

See it done

Synopsys · LLM evaluationBenchmarking and comparing large language models Genie Platforms · AI SDRConversational AI running as production services Mindshine · TIVAVoice and text retrieval across any data source

See more details

I provide independent software engineering consulting for companies building, scaling, or modernizing production software. The engagement is not a body-rental contract and not a slide-only architecture review. I work as a senior engineer and architect: diagnose the real constraint, decide what should exist, and either implement the path or leave the team with a path they can execute. Typical clients are founders, CTOs, heads of engineering, and product companies that need senior independent engineering without hiring a full-time principal engineer or standing up a large vendor team. Work spans product engineering, system design, AI integration, and delivery reliability – always against a live system, a budget, and a date.

Who this is for

Founders and CTOs who need a senior engineer they can put in front of a messy product decision.
Heads of engineering who need extra architecture and delivery capacity without a long hiring cycle.
Product companies whose internal team is strong at shipping, but thin on system design, AI, or modernization.
Digital agencies that need a senior engineering partner on a complex client system.
Teams that already tried a large vendor and now need someone who will own the technical call.

Problems I am brought in to solve

The product is important, but the implementation path is still a set of competing guesses.
Delivery is slow for reasons that are not 'we need more developers'.
AI was added as a demo and now has to live inside a real workflow.
A live platform cannot be rewritten, but it also cannot stay as it is.
Leadership needs an independent view before committing budget to a rewrite, a vendor, or a model.

What the engagement covers

Discovery that maps the system, the workflow, and the data – not a generic capability workshop.
Architecture and implementation for product surfaces, APIs, and automation backends.
AI integration only where the task is ambiguous enough to earn its cost.
Staged modernization of live content and commerce platforms.
Technical advisory for a team that needs leverage, not another full-time hire.
Direct communication with founders, executives, and engineering leadership.

How I work

I start with the constraint – the bottleneck, the budget, the system that cannot be switched off – and choose the least complex solution that survives production. Most of the leverage sits before implementation: what gets built, what gets integrated, and what should not exist. A typical engagement begins with a bounded diagnosis, then a vertical slice that proves the risky assumptions, then production work with typed boundaries, observability, and a recovery path.

Consultant, agency, or another hire

The useful question is not brand. It is which failure mode you are buying insurance against.

Hire internally when the work is ongoing product ownership

If you need someone in stand-ups for years, hire. Consulting compresses judgement and delivery into a defined constraint; it is a poor substitute for a team you intend to keep.

Use an agency when you need a bench

Parallel frontend, backend, QA, and design capacity is a staffing problem. I do not pretend to be a 12-person studio. I am the senior partner you put on the hard path.

Use an independent consultant when the call is expensive

Architecture, AI adoption, rescue, and modernization fail when the wrong thing is built confidently. You want one person whose incentives are the outcome, not utilization.

Do not hire a consultant to rubber-stamp a decision already made

If the rewrite is politically locked, an external report will not save you. I will say so in the first conversation.

Common failure modes I watch for

Staffing a discovery-shaped problem with an implementation team.
Treating 'senior' as a synonym for 'available developer in the stack'.
Buying an AI feature because competitors announced one.
A rewrite justified by taste rather than by a constraint you can measure.

Serviços relacionados

Notas relacionadas

Perguntas que me fazem

How is this different from hiring a freelance developer?

A freelance developer is usually engaged to write a known piece of software. Consulting starts earlier: whether that software should exist, which parts should be deterministic, which should be integrated, and how the live system will absorb the change. I still write production code; the difference is ownership of the decision, not only the diff.

Do you work with companies outside Poland?

Yes. I am based in Gdańsk and work with international product companies remotely. The site and the commercial work are in English; other interface languages exist for readers, not as a claim of local offices.

Can you replace a development agency?

For a focused product, integration, or modernization path – yes, that is the usual alternative to a large vendor team. For a programme that needs many parallel workstreams, you still need a team. I can lead the technical path; I will not staff a factory.

Discuss the actual constraint

If the path is still a set of competing guesses, that is the right moment to talk – not after the stack is already chosen.