Devnox Advisory gets CIOs, boards and engineering teams to agree on one architecture. Then we help them ship it.
Logos and full case studies on request. Most of this work sits behind NDAs.
An organisation running critical services with almost no IT governance. We reviewed the architecture, the cost structure and the team setup, then stayed on to build what was missing: a change advisory board, dedicated release and operations managers, and real communication with the client base.
A cross-border tax-classification SaaS platform, straining as growth outran it. A re-architecture for stability, scale and security cut run costs by 80% and operational costs by half. We then onboarded 500 of the platform's 600 clients onto the rebuilt system.
An audit authority modernising with AI and data mining, under GDPR and the EU AI Act. We architected the platform for compliance and scale, led the technical proposal, and stood up a reusable, auditable framework. The mandate now runs multi-year.
Pick the one that matches where you are. Most clients start with an architecture review and grow from there.
An independent read of your target architecture, gaps and risks, written so a CFO can act on it.
Two to three weeks. Interviews, a document review, and a look at what is actually running versus what the diagrams claim. You get a written assessment of gaps, risks and cost drivers, ranked by what to fix first. The reasoning is included, so you can disagree with it.
Reduce lock-in, restore leverage, and choose the platforms you can defend at board level.
Most lock-in is not technical. It is contractual and organisational. We map where your leverage went: exit costs, data gravity, concentration of skills. Then we set out the options with their real switching cost, so you walk into the next renewal with something to trade.
Lightweight governance that actually gets followed. RACI, ARBs, and decision logs you will still read in a year.
Governance fails the moment it weighs more than the decisions it governs. We start from the decisions you actually make. Who approves an architecture change. Who owns a platform. What gets written down. Then we build the lightest structure that survives a busy quarter.
Practical paths to EU-grade data, identity and infrastructure sovereignty for regulated industries.
Data residency, operational control and legal exposure are three separate questions. Most vendors answer only the first. We work out which ones matter for your regulatory position, which architectures genuinely satisfy them, and what that costs.
Guardrails for AI and data platforms: model risk, access, lineage, and the policies your auditor will ask for.
The EU AI Act turns model choices into documented risk decisions. We put the guardrails in before that becomes a problem: use-case classification, access and lineage, human oversight where the law requires it, and an evidence trail an auditor accepts. All of it wired into how the platform actually runs.
We facilitate the conversation your team has been avoiding. Usually one room, one day, one decision.
The disagreement is rarely technical. The board, the CIO and engineering are answering different questions, and nobody has said so out loud. We prepare with each side separately, then run one session that ends in a decision, with the trade-off written down and owned.
Fractional chief architect on retainer. Present at the right meetings, named in the right documents.
For organisations that need the judgement without the headcount. Typically a few days a month: sitting on the architecture board, reviewing the decisions that are expensive to reverse, and reachable when a vendor conversation turns technical.
Senior coaching for your architects and tech leads. Framework-literate, never framework-bound.
For architects and tech leads who can already build but are still learning to be heard. Writing decisions down. Defending a design to a board. Knowing which battles are worth having. We use TOGAF where it helps and say so plainly where it gets in the way.
Most architecture problems are translation problems. Tap any topic to switch between how the board sees it and how engineering sees it.
Optimised cost, vendor flexibility, no surprises in the quarterly.
We work at the speed of decisions. Every engagement opens with the same three-week diagnostic, then continues in one of two modes.
Interviews with the board, the CIO, the architects, and at least one sceptic. We map what gets said against what is true.
One architecture, two readings. A board memo and an engineering brief, same picture in different language.
A working session that ends with a decision, named owners and a written record. After that we leave, or stay on retainer.
You get an outside read from someone with no stake in the answer, and then we hand it over and go. Independent reviews, second opinions, and the alignment session your team keeps postponing.
Some jobs need building rather than reviewing. We stay on: drafting the governance, reviewing complex architectures release by release, and taking the board seat or setting one up.
15 years at Deloitte. Lead architect & program manager on the engagements below.
Connect on LinkedIn (opens in a new tab)Devnox Advisory is an independent IT architecture practice based in Brussels, Belgium, working with mid-market enterprises and public sector clients across the EU.
Before going independent, Bert Desmet spent fifteen years at Deloitte in enterprise architecture and platform delivery, across public sector, telecom, payroll, asset management and non-profit.
We are small on purpose. Independent reviews, governance work, sovereignty advice and stakeholder alignment only hold up if nobody is quietly selling something. No vendor incentives, no partnership tiers, no bench to keep busy.
Where a larger firm has a reason to tell you what you want to hear, we don't.
Named clients on request. Most engagements are covered by NDA.
No deck, no qualification form. Tell us where you're stuck and we'll tell you whether we can help.