An honest answer on whether you need strategy at all
This is the first deliverable and it is frequently "no, build this one thing instead." I would rather lose the larger engagement than sell you a document you do not need.
Do I need an AI strategy, or just a first build? Under about 200 people, almost always just a first build.
You get a straight answer to that question, and if the answer is that you do not need me for six months, you will hear it on the first call rather than after the invoice.
Most companies under about 200 people do not need an AI strategy document. They need one working build that proves or disproves a specific assumption, which then makes the strategy obvious. Strategy work earns its cost when there are several competing initiatives, real regulatory constraints, or a large team that needs coordinating. Below that, a deck is expensive procrastination.
What is this actually costing you today?
You have said some version of this
- "The board wants an AI strategy and we do not know what that means."
- "We paid $30,000 for a deck and nothing shipped."
- "Five people have five different pilot ideas and none of them are finished."
- "We do not know if we are behind or if this is all hype."
What it costs while it stays unfixed
- $30,000 a typical strategy deck, which produces a document rather than a working system.
- 3 to 6 months of runway spent deciding, when a two-week build would have answered it.
- Five pilots running in parallel with no owner is the most common failure mode I see, and it is expensive.
What do you actually get at the end?
A ranked shortlist, not a landscape survey
Three to five candidate initiatives, each with the assumption it tests, the cost to find out, and what you would do with either answer.
The cheapest experiment that could change your mind
For the top candidate, the smallest build that produces a real signal. Usually 1 to 2 weeks, not a quarter.
A written decision record
What was decided, on what evidence, and what would have to be true to reverse it. So the next person does not relitigate it from scratch.
Does any of this actually work?
These are my own numbers, on my own systems, with the measurement date and instrument named so you can re-run them. They are not client case studies, because I will not put a testimonial on this page before I have one worth quoting.
0 of 10 the baseline I published before starting my own campaign
I recorded and published my own starting position at zero citations across ten target queries before shipping any of the work. Strategy advice from someone who will not show you their own before-number is worth less than it costs.
A retraction published on this site when my own analysis turned out to be wrong
I reported a traffic collapse, then found it was an artifact of my own undersampled data, and published the correction with the corrected numbers. That is the standard of honesty a strategy engagement runs on.
How does this compare to the alternatives?
| This engagement | A management consultancy | Doing nothing yet | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Typical cost | $500 to $1,500 | $30,000 to $250,000 | |
| Output | A decision and a build | A deck and a roadmap | |
| Will tell you to skip it | Yes, and often does | Structurally unlikely | |
| Time to an answer | 1 to 2 weeks | 6 to 12 weeks | |
| Who does the follow-on work | The same person | A separate implementation contract | |
| Risk if the market shifts | Low, the commitment is small | A roadmap written for last quarter | |
What does it cost?
$500 to $1,500
A week of real work, ending in a ranked shortlist and a recommendation. If the recommendation is that you should not be spending on AI yet, that is the deliverable and it is still worth what it cost.
Start with a scoping call →Or email hello@chudi.dev directly.
NO DISCOVERY-CALL FUNNEL · NO RETAINER LOCK-IN · WRITTEN SCOPE BEFORE ANY INVOICE
Questions people ask before hiring me
Do we need an AI strategy?
Below roughly 200 people, usually not. What most companies that size need is one working build that tests a specific assumption, after which the strategy is obvious. Strategy work starts earning its cost when several initiatives compete for the same budget, when regulation constrains what you can build, or when a large team needs coordinating.
What does an AI strategy consultant do?
The useful version does three things: works out which AI initiatives are worth trying, kills the ones that are not, and defines the cheapest experiment that would change your mind about the survivors. The less useful version produces a landscape survey and a roadmap. Ask which one you are buying.
How much does an AI strategy consultant cost?
I charge $500 to $1,500 for a week of work ending in a ranked shortlist and a recommendation. Management consultancies charge $30,000 to $250,000 for adjacent engagements, largely because they staff a team and produce a document. Both can be the right choice; the size of your organisation mostly decides which.
Should we build our own AI or buy an off-the-shelf tool?
Buy when the task is generic and the tool covers your real edge cases. Build when the last 20% is your actual business, when the subscription maths gets worse than a one-time build within about 18 months, or when the data cannot leave your systems. Most companies should buy more than they do and build the one thing that is genuinely theirs.
How do I know if we are behind on AI?
It is the wrong question, because it has no actionable answer. The useful version is whether a specific competitor is doing a specific thing you are not, and whether that thing is winning them work. That is checkable in an afternoon. General anxiety about being behind reliably produces the five-parallel-pilots failure mode.
Can you do AI strategy and then build it?
Yes, and I will tell you upfront that this is a conflict of interest, because the person recommending a build also gets paid to do it. My mitigation is that the strategy engagement is priced to stand alone, the shortlist is written so you can hand it to anyone, and I say no when the honest answer is no.