An independent IT delivery assessment for technology leaders whose programmes are slipping, over budget or releasing with too many defects. PinnacleQM identifies what is really holding delivery back and what to fix first.
30+years of international
IT experience
Programmes rarely fail for one reason. Missed dates, rising defect counts and exhausted business users usually trace back to gaps in governance, test coverage, environments, data or vendor accountability that nobody has had time to step back and examine.
PinnacleQM's senior consultants review your delivery end to end using INsight assessment accelerators. We gather evidence, interview stakeholders and deliver clear findings, prioritised risks and a practical roadmap you can act on straight away. The work is led by senior consultants.
An assessment should give you facts to act on. Ours are grounded in evidence from your programme, measured against industry frameworks and turned into prioritised actions.
Delivered by senior consultants in weeks.
An outside view free of vendor or internal politics, so risks are named clearly and early.
Findings rest on artefacts, metrics and interviews, not impressions, so they stand up to executive scrutiny.
Every risk is rated by business impact and likelihood, so you know what needs attention first.
Recommendations are sequenced into quick wins and longer-term changes, with owners and expected benefits. Nothing is left as a vague observation.
Leaders get a concise picture of delivery health to support go, pause or reset decisions.
The assessment becomes a baseline for measuring improvement, giving you a fair test of whether changes work.
Six areas of delivery reviewed together, because problems in one usually start in another.
We review how decisions are made, escalated and recorded across the programme, including roles, stage gates and reporting, and identify where unclear accountability is slowing delivery or hiding risk from leadership.
We assess whether test strategy, coverage and entry and exit criteria match the programme's real business risks, and whether critical processes, integrations and data are tested early enough. We also check whether test evidence would support a confident release decision.
We analyse defect trends, severity, ageing and root causes, and review triage practices across teams and vendors to find why defects are reaching late stages or production. We then recommend practical changes to triage, ownership and the definition of done.
We review environment availability, stability and release promotion, and whether test data is realistic, protected and ready when teams need it, since both are common hidden causes of delay. We quantify how much time teams lose to environment and data waits.
We review existing automation for coverage, reliability, maintenance effort and reuse, and identify where automation could reduce regression time or free business users. We estimate the effort and savings each opportunity could deliver.
We assess how vendors' quality commitments, deliverables and defects are managed, and whether the programme has one consistent view of quality across all suppliers. We also check how quality obligations are written into contracts and enforced.
A structured, time-boxed assessment that respects your team's time, draws on INsight frameworks and ends with decisions and a roadmap, not just a report.
Agree objectives, scope, stakeholders and the questions leadership needs answered, and confirm timing and access.
Collect artefacts, metrics and defect data, and interview stakeholders across teams and vendors.
Assess findings against INsight frameworks and industry practice, and rate each risk by impact.
Present prioritised findings, quick wins and a sequenced roadmap with owners and benefits.
Help mobilise the first actions and re-measure progress against the baseline. We then re-measure progress against the original baseline.
A state transport department paying around $1 million a year in penalties had every defect tested, fixed and retested, and no longer incurs penalties.
Read more
A state health integration re-platforming was delivered by 7 testers in 12 months against competitor estimates of 40 to 46 testers over 36 months.
Read more
Enginuity as a service and a team of 12 replaced a 125-person offshore regression team across a Big 4 bank's end-to-end lending systems.
Read more
7 min read
What independence adds to testing on multi-vendor programmes, what it does not, and the signs a programme needs it.
7 min read
Tools do not make releases faster by themselves. The practices, ownership and feedback loops that actually change cadence.
7 min read
The evidence, residual risks and conditions a credible go-live recommendation must include for decision-makers to rely on it.
Tell us what is worrying you about your programme: dates, defects, vendors or costs. We will suggest the scope of an assessment that answers the questions your leadership needs answered.
Briefly describe your programme, its stage and your main concern.
