Choosing a new delivery location
Compares shortlisted locations against the organisation’s priorities and identifies candidates that fail essential requirements. Provides a ranked recommendation supported by criterion-level evidence.
— Organisation & Workforce
Ranks candidate locations against weighted workforce and business criteria, tests how cost assumptions affect the result, and produces a board-ready recommendation with a traceable evidence base.
2–3 weeks → ~25 minutes
For a full population, not a sample
No coding required
— USE CASES
Compares shortlisted locations against the organisation’s priorities and identifies candidates that fail essential requirements. Provides a ranked recommendation supported by criterion-level evidence.
Shows how salary inflation, employer costs, workforce ramp-up and attrition affect the relative attractiveness of each location. Identifies the assumptions under which the preferred choice changes.
Provides a board-ready assessment with clear rankings, comparison charts and an audit trail. Makes the rationale, trade-offs and sensitivity of the recommendation explicit.
Assesses locations using agreed weights for talent, cost, time-zone coverage, risk and infrastructure. Makes the contribution of each criterion visible, grounding discussion in explicit priorities.
— HOW IT BEHAVES
The mechanics behind this specific template — what it reads, what it calculates, and where a human stays in the loop.
Current external sources on the organisation in scope are researched during the run rather than recalled from training data, and every source travels with the output.
Each row of your export is processed on the same basis, so no role is skipped however long the table is.
Movement across the organisation in scope is visualised from the computed data, so the trend is legible at a glance.
Findings on the organisation in scope are written up as a document that reads like professional output, with each claim tied back to a role.
Detail rows are summarised into the grouped view of the organisation in scope without losing the underlying roles.
Location decisions involve competing priorities across talent, cost, time zones, risk and infrastructure. Choosing a new delivery location is the typical trigger — compares shortlisted locations against the organisation’s priorities and identifies candidates that fail essential requirements. Provides a ranked recommendation supported by criterion-level evidence. Done properly it is defensible; done at pace it becomes a judgement call nobody can retrace. And "properly" usually means 2–3 weeks of manual work.
Here the same job runs as a Skill. Your material goes in; ranked shortlist with assessment bands and exclusion results comes out, alongside location-by-location score breakdown for each criterion. What sits between input and output is the codified method: thresholds, sequencing and the points where a human confirms a call — all of it visible and editable in the Skill. The practical effect: 2–3 weeks of manual work becomes a ~25 minutes run, held to an identical standard on the tenth engagement as on the first.
Location strategy builder exports as a structured SKILL.md file and is MCP-ready, so the same method runs in ChatGPT, Claude, Copilot or your own AI products. Adapt it to your methodology, and the intelligence stays yours — not locked to one vendor.
Redesigns workflows and roles around the practical use of AI, producing a board-ready plan with task-level recommendations, costed capacity gains and clear workforce implications.
Keeps a standing read on the risk universe in scope, working through risk registers, controls and policy documents on a regular cycle to show where each risk stands, what has moved since the last run and which items now need an owner's attention.
Matches available consultant capacity against the work coming down the pipeline each week, showing where people are about to sit idle, where demand will outstrip the skills you have and which pairings genuinely fit.
Runs a recurring skills survey across the workforce on a set cycle, building a living view of skills and utilisation by department that leadership can track month over month.
Reviews a workforce metrics pack and states what the measures actually imply, rather than restating the numbers.
Builds the core workforce plan by comparing what a strategy requires against current workforce and skills evidence, expressed as roles and capability gaps.