Responsible Partner
Michał Zwyrtek
Partner
Combines a financial, advisory and digital perspective in strategic and implementation projects.
Full profileAdvisory
Digital transformation.
We help boards and teams translate business goals into processes, data, tools and the way the organisation works. We advise on selecting systems, automation and AI solutions, then support their implementation, adoption and change management.
Digital transformation does not start with buying a new system. It starts with understanding processes, data, decision-making and the organisation's readiness for change. Technology is a tool, not an end in itself.
What we do
Scope of work.
Diagnosis of processes and business needs
We analyse where the organisation is losing time, data, money and decision-making capacity. We identify processes that need tidying up, automation or technology support.
Designing the target model
We design how work will be done after the change: roles, responsibilities, information flow, decisions, data, KPIs and touchpoints between the business, finance, HR, operations and IT.
Selecting tools and technology partners
We help select ERP, CRM, BI, workflow, low-code/no-code, AI and automation solutions. We use our market knowledge and technology partnerships to match tools to the organisation's real needs.
Implementation coordination
We support the board and teams in running the project: scope, timetable, priorities, vendors, decisions, risks, communication and controlling the results of the implementation.
Change management and adoption
We prepare the organisation to work in the new way: change communication, training, governance, leader support, measuring tool usage and embedding new working standards.
AI and automation as part of the transformation
We help assess where AI and automation make business sense, how to prepare the data and processes, and how to safely deploy tools that support decisions, customer service and team work.
See the AI area
Who we work with
Who we work with.
We work with boards, owners and operational, finance, HR and IT teams. We translate business needs into technology requirements and help guide the organisation through change.
Growing companies tidying up processes
We help organise work, data and responsibilities before choosing new systems or automating.
Organisations changing ERP, CRM, BI or workflow
We support tool selection, vendor discussions, requirements gathering and managing implementation on the business side.
Companies implementing AI and automation
We help identify use cases, assess process readiness and select tools with a measurable business case.
Organisations requiring change management
We support communication, training, adoption and embedding new ways of working after a technology roll-out.
Partner responsible for this practice
Insights
Related analyses and publications.
Digital
A business ready for succession. Michał Zwyrtek on AI, digital transformation and generational change
Michał Zwyrtek explains how AI, digital transformation and organisational readiness can support succession in a family-owned business.
8 min read
Digital
AI does not change organisations. People do. Lessons from two October events
Michał Zwyrtek shares lessons from the CFO Forum 2026 and QUANTUM meeting on AI, leadership and organisational change.
6 min read
Digital
The new Union Customs Code: what the reform means for importers, e-commerce and supply chains
The new Union Customs Code: the EUR 3 per-item duty, the EU Customs Data Hub, deemed importers, Trust and Check Trader versus AEO, VAT and the IOSS, the timeline to 2034 and an action checklist for importers, e-commerce and supply chains.
11 min read
FAQ
Frequently asked questions.
Yes — we do not take commission from vendors. We base system selection solely on the client's needs.
For a mid-sized company — from 6 to 14 months, depending on scale, the number of locations and how standardised the processes are.
Yes, for well-defined scopes. For scopes discovered along the way — on a time-and-materials basis with a budget.
From a diagnosis of processes and decisions, not from choosing a system. The first step is establishing where the organisation is losing time, data and control over costs, and which decisions the board is making without reliable information. We then identify the processes with the greatest impact on results and risk, simplify them, and only then assess whether a change of tools, integration or automation is needed. This order limits the cost of the project, because you are not buying functionality to support activities that should disappear. The first stage ends with a transformation map: priorities, the scope of the first step, an estimate of effort and how results will be measured.
No. An ERP makes sense where scale, the number of transactions, multiple sites or the complexity of production require one consistent system for records and planning. In many companies, a better effect comes from tidying up processes, introducing workflow, reporting and integrating existing tools — at a fraction of the cost and risk. We precede the decision with an analysis of which problems an ERP will actually solve and which stem from the organisation of work and data. We sometimes recommend postponing implementation by a year and using that time to organise master data, because that is what most often decides the success of the project.
By starting from defining the sales process, not by comparing features. You need to establish how the company acquires and serves customers, what data is needed at each stage, and what information the board expects. Only on that basis do requirements, a shortlist and demonstration scenarios emerge, in which vendors show work on the client's own cases rather than a generic demo. Integration with the sales and finance systems, ease of use for salespeople, and total cost of ownership all matter. Ultimately, though, adoption decides success: a CRM works when it shortens the team's work, not just when it feeds reports.
By organising data, processes and responsibilities. Artificial intelligence does not remove organisational chaos — it replicates it faster. We assess five areas: data quality and availability, process repeatability, designated owners, governance rules and the culture of working with information. We then choose use cases with limited risk and a measurable effect, set rules on what data may go into the tools, and define how results will be checked by a human. We run the pilot with a success metric and a decision on scaling once it is verified. In parallel, we prepare managers for the change in how work is done, since that is most often where roll-outs stall.
It depends on scope, but it is rarely a single project. Diagnosis and a transformation map usually take 4–8 weeks. Tidying up processes and data is a further 2–6 months, depending on scale and the number of locations. Implementing an ERP at a mid-sized company takes 6 to 14 months; implementing workflow or BI usually 2–5 months. Adoption and embedding a new way of working require a further few quarters. That is why we run the transformation in stages, so that each step delivers a standalone effect rather than freezing the organisation for two years in one large project with a distant payback.
The most common causes are not technological. The project is treated as an IT matter, there is no sponsor on the board and no process owners on the business side, decisions are made too slowly, and key people have no time for the project. On top of that come poor data migrated into the new system, scope creep and a lack of change management. As a result, the system reproduces the existing way of working, and users go back to spreadsheets. That is why, in our projects, we set the target processes, responsibilities, decision discipline and adoption metrics up front, and we run the implementation through to the point where the organisation is genuinely working in the new way.
Yes. We run the selection process on the client's side: gathering requirements, building evaluation criteria, preparing the request for proposal, a long and short list, presentation scenarios and a comparison of offers including total cost of ownership. We check references directly and verify the team that will actually work on the project. We take part in commercial negotiations and, with the legal team, look after the implementation contract: scope, deadlines, liability, configuration rights, knowledge transfer and maintenance terms. Our role is to represent the client's interest, which is why we do not sell licences or take fees from vendors.
Yes. We are not a reseller, we do not sell our own software and we do not take commission from vendors. Our recommendation follows solely from the client's needs and situation, not a commission model. We know the ERP, CRM, BI, workflow, low-code and AI markets and maintain vendor relationships, but these relationships do not affect the outcome of the selection process. In our project documentation we always show the evaluation criteria and the reasoning behind the recommendation, so the board can verify how the decision was reached. If staying with the current system is the best solution in a given case, we say so directly.
Yes. We take on the project-management role on the client's side: scope, timetable, budget, risks, decisions, communication with the vendor and reporting to the board. We run design workshops, check that the configuration matches what was agreed, oversee data migration, user testing and the go-live plan. We enforce discipline around scope change, since that is the most common cause of budget overruns. The vendor is responsible for its own products but cannot replace an owner of the project on the company side — especially in organisations where the internal team must run day-to-day operations at the same time. After go-live, we support stabilisation and the transfer of competence to the client's team.
Yes, as an integral part of the project, not an add-on after implementation. The scope covers analysing the impact of the change on individual roles, a communication plan, engaging leaders and middle managers, training embedded in real work, post-launch support, and measuring actual tool adoption. We also work on removing old ways of working, because as long as spreadsheets and emails keep running in parallel, the organisation reverts to them under time pressure. Change sticks when the new way of working is simpler than the old one and when usage metrics are regularly discussed by leadership.
Through business effects defined before the project starts. These are most often: process cycle time, unit cost per operation, the number of errors and corrections, month-end close time, inventory levels, team productivity and actual usage of the implemented tool. On the cost side, we include licences, implementation, maintenance, internal team time and the cost of the transition period. We calculate the return over a 24–36-month horizon, with scenarios. It is essential to set the baseline before the change — without measuring the starting point, discussion of ROI after implementation becomes a matter of opinion rather than verifiable numbers.
Yes, from a business and organisational perspective. We start by identifying processes where automation or AI genuinely shorten time, lower cost or improve the quality of decisions, and then assess the readiness of data, processes and teams. We set security and compliance rules, choose pilot cases with a measurable effect and define how results will be checked. We run implementation together with technology vendors and with change management, because the biggest risk is not the model but the organisation failing to adopt the solution. We cover this in more depth in our dedicated artificial intelligence practice.
Are you planning to implement or modernise systems?
Book a 30-minute call with a partner. No obligation, no fee.