How work scales when a program surges
And how long it takes to arrive once you have decided you need it.
Business case
Build the case before we make it.
Three open tools, no login, every assumption editable. They are the same conversation we would have with you, in the order we would have it. Take them in sequence and you arrive at your own numbers rather than ours.
No loginRuns in your browserConservative by construction
Step 01 · Diagnose
Where does your evidence capacity actually come from?
And what happens to it under pressure? The maturity assessment walks four dimensions and scores each one honestly, including the ones where the answer is uncomfortable.
Enforced, or reconstructed afterwards
Whether authority is checked before an action or assembled from logs when someone asks.
Can last year’s analysis be re-run
And does it produce the same answer, or an answer nobody can now explain?
What survives when an engagement ends
The capability, or a folder of outputs and the memory of the people who left.
Most organizations score well on one dimension and badly on the rest - and the pattern tells you which function to fix first, which is the point of running it before anything else.
Step 02 · Quantify
What the capacity gap costs you today.
The model is built around value that shows up in a real profit and loss statement rather than notional productivity. Five lines, all of which a finance team can challenge.
01
Cycle time
What each week of delay is worth on the programs it sits on.
02
Work not done
The analyses skipped because they were not worth the change order.
03
Knowledge re-bought
The ramp cost paid again at the start of every engagement.
04
Rework
What a failed conformance check or an unreproducible result costs when it is found late.
05
Data preparation
Normalization, de-identification and license administration currently bought as services.
Defaults are set low deliberately. A business case built on generous assumptions does not survive contact with a finance team, and we would rather you argue the numbers up than have them argued down.
Step 03 · Compare
Compare against the total, not the software line.
This is the step most vendor models skip, because it is the one where the comparison gets uncomfortable for them. Your current stack has four lines, and the platform license is the smallest of them.
Internal headcount
The people performing these functions inside your organization today.
Contracted and functional-service spend
The benches you hire by the hour, plus every change order on top.
Licensed and normalized data
Including the preparation you buy back in someone else’s shape.
Platform and tooling licenses
The only line most vendor comparisons show you.
StromaOS targets three of those four cost layers. Normalization and de-identification stop being purchased services, contracted capacity becomes elastic, and the knowledge that would have left stays as an asset that lowers the next program’s cost.
Two audiences, one case
Your quality team needs a way to say yes. Your CFO needs a model.
These are different arguments and both have to land. The tools are built so one set of inputs produces both.
Head of Quality, Biostatistics, Regulatory or Safety
Wants capacity without a compliance problem. The maturity assessment gives them the internal argument: here is where our governance is reconstructed rather than enforced, and here is what that costs us when someone asks.
CFO, COO or Head of Development Operations
Wants the line to move. The ROI and TCO models speak to contracted services, headcount and data spend - the lines that are actually large - rather than to a software budget that was never the point.
Bring your numbers
Or bring the raw figures and we will build it with you.
Run the tools first if you would rather arrive with a position. Either way we will build the model together in a working session - including the parts where the answer is no.