September 18 readout. Private working document.
Prepared for Ken Crafford, Lars Rabbe, Joseph Frascati, Maureen Vavra and Greg Higham. Please do not forward.
Every sticky, every star and every line from Friday is on this page, alongside the one-liners we promised for Monday and what we think the website becomes. Nothing here is decided. It is built to be marked up.
Companion page: What we built since Friday, with everything we built in the seven days after the session: the search data behind the lane and the first screens of the site.
The lane is interim and fractional leadership. The stance is senior operators who tell you the truth and have nothing to sell you. The one-liner is four options below, and we recommend the first.
The lane answers what we market first. The stance answers why a CFO picks you over Gartner, Fortium or a big consultancy. They are not competing answers; one is what we say, the other is why it lands. Maureen named the second one when she voted outside the five cards, and Lars and Ken were already circling it on the first board.
Three things said out loud on Friday change the website more than any headline: the buyer is usually the CFO, COO or CEO rather than the CIO; you do not do delivery, you bring judgment; and most of your work today arrives through relationships that have a shelf life. Each one is worked through below.
Three quick calls on the first screens are on What we built since Friday. The full list, with what is done crossed out, is on the portal home.
Stars are the ones the room locked in. Filter by who wrote it.
Orange stickies were written under Maureen's color; a few are unsigned and may be another partner's. "Hauling em outta a ditch" stays as internal shorthand and never goes on a page, because a client can hear it as a verdict on themselves. "Yes, we are old" is the most honest line on the board; the point behind it, that experience matters, goes everywhere, and the phrasing stays on the wall.
We seeded fourteen ways to describe the work. Here is how you voted, ranked.
On "you are not the first, and the fix is already known": "We never say that. It's really important that we listen to the client. Even if we really do understand what the fix is, we've got to spend our time listening and convincing them that we really understand their business and their issues." Almost every engagement starts with an assessment. That rule now governs every line we write for the site.
We seeded "the problem is rarely the technology, it is the sequence." Lars wrote "the problem is rarely the plan, it is almost always the execution." The two merged on the call: "The problem is rarely the technology or the plan. It's almost always the execution." That is a point of view, it is ownable, and it is quietly a swipe at every firm that sells a plan and leaves. It shows up in option three below.
A home page needs a headline and a subhead, so each option is a pair. Under each we show which of your stickies it came from. Our recommendation is marked, and the reasoning is honest about the trade.
Senior operators, called in when the stakes are highest.
Former CIOs, CISOs and CTOs who have already solved this. Candid assessments, no vendor bias.
Built from: the three cards that tied at three stars, verbatim. Lowest risk, because the room already voted for every word. The subhead carries the independence claim without leaning on the phrase "trusted advisor," which every firm in the category uses.
We have sat in the chair. We have nothing to sell you but the right answer.
Interim and fractional technology leadership from operators who have run it at companies you know.
Built from: "we have sat in the chair" (one star) and "candid, no vendor bias" (three). The most memorable of the four and the most conversational. Slight risk that "nothing to sell you" reads as a swipe, which the room said it wanted to avoid saying bluntly.
The problem is rarely the technology. It is almost always the execution.
Senior operators who find what is actually wrong, and help your team fix it.
Built from: Lars's starred line and our seed, merged on the call. The strongest hook for a CFO holding the bag, because it names the situation without blaming anyone. It is a belief rather than a description, so it works best as the first section header under option one rather than as the headline itself.
Something bigger than IT is on the line. We find what is actually wrong.
People, process, technology and risk, assessed without an agenda, by operators who have held the seat. Then we help your team fix it, and learn to.
Built from: Maureen's "there's a problem and we can help you solve it," Lars's starred "we look at everything, people, process, technology and risk," and "we help you learn how to fix your own problems" from the discussion. The most complete. Also the longest, which is the trade.
Innovate Today, Lead Tomorrow.
Fusing strategic transformation and technology execution, shifting the future of business.
What it does well: explains the name, and covers all five practices. What it does not do: say who you are or who it is for. A reader learns the method before learning there are former Fortune 500 CIOs behind it. Useful as the measuring stick.
Former CIOs, CISOs and CTOs who have already solved this. Candid assessments, no vendor bias.
Start with a conversationLead with option one as the headline, because every word of it already has three stars and nobody has to defend it. Use option three as the first section header underneath, because it is the belief that makes the headline mean something. Keep option two's "nothing to sell you but the right answer" for the About page and the outreach notes, where a more conversational register is right. Fold option four's "help your team fix it, and learn to" into the How We Work section, because it is the single most differentiated thing anyone said on Friday and it deserves its own paragraph rather than half a subhead.
Chosen for where marketing changes the number, not for where revenue is largest today. It is the lane with the most visible demand, twelve thousand open fractional and interim CIO postings in the United States, and the one that cross-sells into everything else. An interim CIO engagement opens security, digital and AI work. The reverse is rarely true.
Maureen voted outside the five cards because none of them carried this, and she was right. In her words: "When we first have the conversation with a client who's in trouble, we don't know whether they need an interim CIO or not yet. What we do know is they're in trouble, and we have the expertise to solve their problem." That is the umbrella. The five practices sit under it.
| Practice | Owner | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Interim and fractional leadership | Open | To be named this week. This is the one that matters, because it is the lane. |
| Cybersecurity | Henry | Assigned |
| AI | Joseph | Assigned. Joseph agreed on the call. |
| Private equity | Greg | Assigned |
| Digital strategy | Open | Not discussed. The read on the call was that it is table stakes under the umbrella rather than a lane of its own. |
One thing worth saying plainly: picking a lane to market first is not a statement about what you are. You were clear on the 15th that private equity is a small share of the work. And security is your largest practice, which is exactly why it needs the marketing least. This is the order we tell the story in, nothing more.
"It takes a very confident CIO to allow us to come in and talk about restructuring their organization. But for a COO, a CFO, a CEO, that's what they want to hear."
So the home page is not written to the CIO. It is written to the executive holding the bag, described on the call as someone at the business level with a very visible problem. Every line of copy is addressed to that person, and the CIO is treated as a colleague rather than the buyer.
"We've been debating changing the way we talk about the firm and not trying to make ourselves sound like we can deliver AI, because we fundamentally don't do delivery."
So AI is a judgment page, not a capability page. The site says what you bring to an AI decision: governance, cost discipline, organizational change, and finding the right partner to build. It never claims to build. Joseph owns this lane and this is the brief.
"They were getting documents that were huge and inclusive and covered every word that had been spoken. But they were also blatantly copied from the previous gig."
So there is a How We Work section, and it never names a competitor. Listen first. Assess people, process, technology and risk. Come back with a condensed, applicable package. Teach the team to handle the next one. The question on the call was how to convey this without saying it bluntly; the answer is to describe your process so specifically that the contrast is obvious.
"We help you learn how to fix your own problems."
The example given was Lars, who fixes the immediate problem and then teaches the team how to handle the next one themselves.
So the site promises to leave the team better, not just the problem solved. This is the most differentiated claim anyone made on Friday and it appeared on no card. It gets its own paragraph.
"Those relationships have a use-by date. They'll think of us for the first few years, but then we're out of their mind. We won't be top of mind five years down the road, but we should be."
So the site is the front end of a rhythm, not a brochure. Sixty to seventy percent of revenue comes through the network. The job is not to replace that, it is to extend its shelf life with a point of view that lands in front of former clients every few weeks.
"We used to have a partner who did a significant amount of outreach. Any conference you could think of, he would appear. He was the face of the company. We're not doing a lot of that right now. None of us are."
So the site has to do part of that job. The point made on the call: that outreach kept you in front of people who knew you and got strangers to call. The Points of View section is where the first half happens. Speaking and podcast placement is where the second half does, and that is a later phase.
Your technical SEO is already at 100. This is about what a CFO reads in the first thirty seconds and whether they stay.
Three small things to fix in week one, no decision needed: the page title is narrower than the firm; the meta description leans twice on a marketing adjective we would cut; and the home page has a Webflow placeholder block still visible near the mission section. None of it is a problem. All of it is a Tuesday.
The register is the partner profile we built for the CIO chair: StrataFusion's own palette, serif headlines, a lot of white space, one proof told in full. The first screens are built in it, with three directions for the home page rather than one, so the choice is a reaction rather than an evaluation. See the screens
Rescue, turnaround, fix, clean up, salvage. Every line that put the client in the wrong scored zero on Friday.
That you deliver AI, or build anything. Your words on the 18th: you fundamentally do not do delivery. The site says judgment, governance, and finding the right partner.
Thirty-one operators. You corrected this on the call. It is about a dozen partners, and the rest are advisors and associates. Our error, fixed below.
Any competitor by name. The contrast is made by describing your process, not theirs.
The Fractional 360 principles were written from the August bench sessions, before Friday happened. Set them beside what you starred and they line up almost one to one. That is the strongest evidence yet that the StrataFusion site and the Fractional 360 site are one story told at two doors.
| What you starred on Friday | The Fractional 360 principle, written in August |
|---|---|
| Candid assessments and recommendations with no vendor bias | The trusted advisor to the C-suite, with nothing to gain from telling them anything but the truth. |
| Senior operators who have already solved this · Experience matters | Knowledge got cheap. Experience did not. |
| We do not do delivery, we bring judgment | AI has no judgment, and no stake in whether you win. |
| We help you learn how to fix your own problems | Leave the organization as its strategic future self. |
| Called when the stakes are highest · Steady the ship, hand it back better | We are there through the hard part, and still there when it becomes a rocket ship. |
| Most companies cannot hire a CIO of this caliber full time | Advisory at the right level beats a seat you cannot afford. |
What this means for the build. The stance goes on both sites in the same words. The StrataFusion site is where a CFO with a technology problem lands; the Fractional 360 site is where a CEO who needs more than one seat lands; and each points to the other. Both firms want one consistent view of the offering across both sites. This table is the consistency. The people are the same, the principles are the same, and the only thing that changes is which door the buyer walked in.
One difference worth keeping. Fractional 360 sells the coordinated team: one plus one plus one equals twelve, in the bench's own phrase. StrataFusion sells the seat and the judgment behind it. Both are true, and a CFO who arrives at StrataFusion for an interim CIO should discover the bench exists, not be sold it in the first sentence.
The library runs from 2020 to early 2025, and the most recent piece is about DeepSeek. Two of them are genuinely good and worth keeping in front: the private equity carve-out guide, and the fractional leadership piece, which is on the lane. The rest can stay, dated, while three new pieces go in front of them.
It came up on Friday that most technology organizations are expecting a forty to fifty percent haircut from AI productivity, and that nobody is thinking the organizational side through. The surveys back the expectation and not the result: 53 percent of IT leaders believe AI will let them reduce headcount, and only 14 to 17 percent report an actual reduction a year later.
The gap between the plan and the result is the organizational problem described in the room. It is also, word for word, "the problem is rarely the plan, it is the execution." This piece writes itself, and the point about token costs running away is the second half of it.
The line you built on Friday, at essay length. Three engagements where the plan was fine and the execution was not, what the pattern looks like from the inside, and why senior operators see it before a consultancy does. No client names needed. This is the piece that gets forwarded.
Written for the CFO or CEO, not the CIO. You already have a 2023 piece on this lane, "The Leadership Gap Imperative," which is the seed. The five situations where an interim or fractional seat is the right call, the two where it is not, and what to expect in the first ninety days. This is the piece the outreach notes link to, and the one answer engines will find first, because it is the question buyers actually type.
Maureen's stance is the right one and it stays. The phrase itself is worth a thought. We checked how the category uses it: Hartman, RedHelm, SC&H and most of the boutique firms lead with it, and two of them use it as a setup for "but we also deliver," which is the opposite of your position. So the site carries the stance in fresher words that no competitor is using: candid, no vendor bias, sat in the chair, nothing to sell you but the right answer. The idea is Maureen's. The words are yours from the first board.
Thirty-one operators. We counted every name on your team page, which includes advisors and associates. Your correction on the call: "We don't have 31 operators. If we're talking about partners, we've got a dozen." The kickoff page and this page now say about a dozen partners. Better number anyway. A dozen people who have held the seat is a stronger claim than thirty-one names.
Leading with private equity. You raised it on the 15th and again on the 18th. Our early materials leaned on PE because that is where we had the most material. Your site lists it fifth of five and it is not a majority of the work. The lane cards were reordered before Friday's session, and the home page above leads with interim and fractional. PE keeps its owner and its guide, and takes its turn.
In writing, on this page or by reply. Strike, keep, or change a word. If one of you would not say it out loud to a CFO, say so. Edits to these four keep this to a short exchange.
Interim and fractional leadership needs an owner. Security, AI and private equity have theirs. This is the one that cannot wait, because it decides whose voice the home page is written in.
Everfox is on record and will carry the home page. We need a second story for the How We Work section: what you walked into, what you did, one number, where it is now. Unnamed is fine. The coatings example from the 15th, told without the name, is exactly the shape.
Three more, all quick, are on What we built since Friday: a home page direction, the lane page title, and a yes or no on AI governance.
| When | What happens | Who |
|---|---|---|
| Week of Sep 28 | You react to the headlines in writing Waiting on you. The lane owner is named Waiting on you. | StrataFusion · IG |
| Week of Oct 5 | Headline and subhead locked. | David, Ashlesha · Joseph |
| Week of Oct 12 | Home page direction built out. Copy written. How We Work page drafted First screen done. POV two drafted with Lars. Second engagement story received. | IG · Lars · the lane owner |
| Week of Oct 19 | Home page and How We Work on staging for review. POV three drafted. Partner profile pages started on the CIO-chair template, two at a time Template shown. | IG · David |
| Week of Oct 26 | Live, or a written reason it is not. Points of View cadence set: one piece a month, owner rotates. | Everyone |
This table is mirrored, with what is done crossed out, on the portal home. That is the one to check.
Two things run alongside this and are not on the table above. The Fractional 360 site goes up on its own domain, and it carries the same stance and the same seats, so the two efforts stay one story. And the outreach test starts as soon as the lane has an owner, because that is who signs the first note.