You don't need another implementation pitch. You need to know what's actually blocking the project, how much of the work so far is usable, and what it will take to finish.
We start with five days of evidence — reviewing scope, configuration, data, integrations, and testing — and end with a recovery plan your leadership can decide from. We don't quote a new go-live date before we've seen the remaining work.
Stalled implementations rarely announce themselves. They show up as a go-live that moves a second time, a UAT cycle that keeps producing new gaps, and a team quietly building spreadsheets to get their work done.
Go-live has moved more than once, and the new date doesn't feel firmer than the last one.
Every round of UAT surfaces gaps that feel like they should have been caught in design.
The budget has been revised upward more than once, and the scope hasn't visibly grown to match.
Your team has built spreadsheets and manual workarounds to keep operating.
Data migration is still unresolved, or the numbers don't reconcile against the legacy system.
Integrations work in testing but behave differently under real volume.
The customization count keeps rising, and nobody's certain which ones are still needed.
Nobody can give you a clear, current answer on what work actually remains.
Status updates describe activity rather than progress against milestones.
Your users have seen the system and don't yet trust it enough to rely on it.
One of these on its own is normal on a complex project. Several at once usually means the issue is structural, and no amount of additional effort inside the current plan will resolve it.
Get a 5-Day Health CheckA fixed engagement with a fixed end date. We work through the areas Microsoft's own implementation guidance treats as go-live gates — scope and governance, solution architecture, data migration, integrations, testing, and user readiness — and we do it with evidence rather than status reports.
Each day produces a finding. Day five produces the plan.
The findings are specific enough to act on and honest about what they'll cost. If the right answer is that your current partner finishes the job with a corrected plan, we'll say that — and the document works just as well in their hands as ours.
A stalled implementation doesn't mean starting over. Most of what's been built is usually worth keeping — the question is which parts, and that's an evidence question, not a sales one. Here's exactly where our scope begins and ends.
The health check ends in one of three recommendations. Which one depends entirely on what the evidence shows — and we'd rather tell you the cheap answer when it's the right one than sell you the expensive one.
The foundation holds. Configuration, data model, and architecture are broadly sound, and the project stalled on execution rather than design. We correct the critical gaps and drive it to go-live.
The build is sound, but it's solving a problem the business has moved past. We reset scope against what the organization needs now, then finish against that definition rather than the original one.
The least common outcome, and one we only recommend with evidence behind it. The current foundation can't reasonably carry the required outcome, so continuing to patch it costs more than restarting properly.
Stabilize what's broken. Keep what works. Replace what doesn't. Re-scope what's changed. Restarting is the last option on that list, not the first — and the assessment is what tells us which one you're looking at.
Tell us which Dynamics 365 apps are in scope, roughly where the project got to, and what's concerning you most. We'll confirm whether a health check is the right next step — and if it isn't, we'll tell you that too.
Everything you need to know about BrowseWise and AI-powered website assistance.
A focused five-day review to identify blockers, root causes, remaining scope, and what it will take to move the implementation forward.
We review project scope, configuration, architecture, data migration, integrations, testing, security, and user readiness.
No. We assess what has already been built and determine what can be retained, corrected, or replaced based on the evidence.
Not automatically. We first identify what is usable and only recommend rebuilding where the evidence supports it.
You receive a recovery plan covering critical findings, root causes, priority fixes, remaining scope, recovery options, and an estimated timeline.
Yes. We can take over specific workstreams or the wider implementation when that is the right recovery route.
Still have questions? Our experts are here to help.
Talk to an Expert
