The existing platform is slow to evolve or expensive to maintain.
Architecture audit
Software architecture audit
Assess the technical solidity of a platform before migration, modernisation or fundraising. Mapping, technical debt and prioritised recommendations.
Decision path
1
Situation shared
Proposal, vendor, budget or technical choice.
2
Independent read
Risks, blind spots, dependencies and options.
3
Clear decision
Continue, correct, reframe or stop.
Risk signals
BudgetExposure
DependencyVendor
ScopeUnclear
ReversibilityTo verify
The objective is not to dramatize the risk, but to make the decision readable.
For whom
Leadership situations where an independent senior view changes the decision.
Use this page to review an existing software platform: quality, technical debt, maintainability and modernisation priorities.
SMEs already operating custom software or a platform that has become difficult to evolve.
Leadership teams preparing modernisation, migration, fundraising or vendor change.
Product owners and founders who need a readable view of technical debt.
Organisations that need to prioritise fixes before investing further.
Timing
When to ask for Architecture audit
Technical debt is mentioned but not quantified in business terms.
A migration or modernisation is being discussed.
Leadership needs to understand quality risk before funding more work.
A vendor or internal team proposes a rewrite without enough evidence.
If this looks close to your situation, you can describe it now. The form is short and focused on qualification.
What is reviewed
A decision-oriented review, not another vague technical discussion.
The work focuses on the choices, dependencies and risks leadership must understand before committing further.
Existing software quality
Review of maintainability, structural risk, debt signals and evolution constraints.
Modernisation pressure
Clarification of what truly needs refactoring, rewriting, stabilising or leaving alone.
Risk prioritisation
Translation of technical debt into business impact and sequencing.
Audit recommendation
A prioritised view of what to fix first and what not to over-engineer.
Deliverables
A concrete output for leadership.
- Clear decision note.
- Prioritised risks and open questions.
- Vendor or stakeholder questions to clarify before commitment.
- Recommended next decision for leadership.
Intervention format
Architecture audit
Short or recurring format, scoped according to the decision risk and the level of exposure.
Useful resource: Checklist: critical technical debt
Positioning
What Mahthildis does not do.
No development work sold behind the recommendation.
No vendor resale and no referral commission.
No low-cost bidding exercise used to force an artificial price.
No recommendation biased by a stack or delivery capacity to place.
FAQ
Common questions.
When should leadership ask for an independent review?
When a technical choice creates budget, vendor or trajectory exposure that cannot be challenged comfortably in-house.
Is this a delivery engagement?
No. Mahthildis advises and arbitrates on the leadership side without selling development capacity.
Can the current vendor be involved?
Yes, when it helps clarify facts and assumptions. The recommendation remains independent.
What is the expected outcome?
A clearer decision: continue, correct, reframe, renegotiate or stop.
Start by clarifying the decision before committing further.
Describe the situation briefly. Mahthildis will confirm whether a short diagnostic is the right entry point or whether another frame is more suitable.