Architecture & decision engagement
Decide what belongs in cloud, on owned infrastructure, and what should be retired.
You receive a map of the agreed systems, recommendations on what to keep, move or retire, a proposed design and a staged implementation plan. Cost assumptions support your budget. Private AI requirements are included only when agreed in scope.
PricePrice fixed after a short scope call.
DeliveryThe proposal names the start date, the change windows and the completion date before anything is agreed.
What you receive · illustrative sample
A review should leave you with a decision.
Illustrative findings record. Defined follow-on work can be quoted; unresolved dependencies carry assumptions and estimates.
| Finding | Decision needed | What you receive |
|---|---|---|
| Unclear system ownership | Confirm accountable owner | Owner/dependency register |
| Renewal or capacity choice | Compare equivalent options | Dated assumptions and cost basis |
| Priority correction | Agree scope and acceptance | Plan with responsibilities and next steps |
Meet the person responsible for delivery.
Alwatheq Zboun leads the agreed work. A sample shows the format; the statement of work defines your deliverable and acceptance checks.
Engagement context
When this engagement applies.
A support deadline, cloud bill, capacity problem, recovery concern or private-AI requirement has forced an infrastructure decision that should not be made from a vendor quote alone.
Scope considerations
- Read-only architecture engagement
- Public cloud, private infrastructure or a hybrid estate
- Named technical and budget decision owners
The defined work
Engagement scope.
- 01
Cloud, server, storage, network and recovery components are mapped to the workloads that depend on them.
- 02
Requirements for availability, recovery, security, data location, capacity and support are agreed.
- 03
Each workload receives a keep, move or retire decision across public cloud, private infrastructure or a hybrid route.
- 04
The target design, implementation sequence, decision risks and budget inputs are documented for approval.
Acceptance
Completion has an agreed standard.
Done when the decision owner accepts the verified current state, the route for every in-scope workload and an implementation sequence that can be priced.
The current environment and its critical dependencies are verified
Every in-scope workload has a keep, move or retire decision
The target architecture includes availability, recovery, ownership and operating requirements
The implementation sequence, decision risks and budget inputs are accepted by the decision owner
Commercial basis
Price, scope and timing are considered together.
Engagement price
Price fixed after a short scope call.
The price is agreed in writing before any work starts and before anyone is given access. The call itself costs nothing. What moves the number:
What determines the scope
- Number of sites, workloads and cloud subscriptions
- Server, storage, network and backup platforms in scope
- Availability, recovery and data-location requirements
- Whether private-cloud or GPU capacity has to be sized
Delivery calendar
The proposal names the start date, the change windows and the completion date before anything is agreed.
How engagements workScope & responsibilities
The full engagement boundary.
Review the exclusions, required client participation, change controls and operational handover for this engagement.
Exclusions
- No production settings, workloads or data are changed during the review
- No hardware purchase, rack installation or vendor contract negotiation
- No migration, platform upgrade or restore fixes
- Implementation is scoped and approved separately from the architecture decision
Client responsibilities
- Provide read-only access and existing diagrams, bills and support records
- Nominate owners who can confirm workload and recovery requirements
- Make the final platform and budget decisions
Change and rollback method
- Discovery uses read-only platform evidence, configuration exports and owner interviews.
- Assumptions are separated from verified facts and assigned before they can drive the target design.
- No platform is selected until the business, technical and operating requirements are agreed.
Operational record and handover
- Verified current-state architecture and dependency map
- Workload decision register: keep, move or retire
- Target architecture with availability, recovery and ownership requirements
- Implementation sequence, decision risks and budget inputs
- Private-AI capacity and hardware requirements where included
Before you commit
A clear first step.
You stay in control.
Start with the problem and the result you need. The initial fit conversation is free and does not require access to your systems.
Check client feedback on Upwork ↗Prefer to contract through Upwork? Contact Alwatheq there. Existing Upwork engagements continue through Upwork.
Who will actually do the work?
Alwatheq Zboun leads the scope, technical work and handover. If a specialist collaborator is needed, their role is agreed with you before work starts. Your proposal names the responsibilities and delivery windows.
What happens before you get access?
We agree the scope, fee and completion checks in writing. Access uses named accounts and only the permissions the work requires. Approved access is reviewed and removed at handover.
How do we know the change worked?
Your scope defines the pilot, test cases and acceptance checks. Results and exceptions are recorded. Recovery options and their limits are agreed before production changes; a failed check is addressed before the next approved stage.
Will we need an ongoing retainer?
A defined project can end at handover. Your team receives the agreed configuration records, runbook and walkthrough. Any limited support period is written into the proposal; ongoing support or additional work is a separate agreement.
Discuss this engagement
Put the scope in context.
Describe the problem, systems and deadline. Alwatheq will review the fit and the scope questions before preparing a written proposal.
Plan the Infrastructure Review