How We Diagnose.
Before anything is proposed, we establish what is actually true: where the pressure is coming from, what has already been attempted, and which change has to happen first.
The method is called Genexis ARC. It runs from readiness to run-rate, and it opens with twelve questions — published here rather than held back, because the order they are asked in is the same order the work gets sequenced.
Genexis ARC
Readiness to run-rate.
Most transformation programs are not undone by the wrong strategy. They are undone by the right work in the wrong order — the visible change delivered ahead of the structural change that was supposed to hold it up. The arc is the shape that work takes over time. The method establishes where a company currently sits on it, and what has to be true before the next move.
Four stages. Each has a condition that must be met before the next begins, and that condition is agreed in writing rather than assumed.
Readiness
Where the company sits on the arc, and which constraints are load-bearing rather than merely visible. The first engagement is diagnostic, not prescriptive. Twelve questions establish the fixed dates, the dependencies, the prior attempts and the governance that will either carry the work or stall it. What emerges is a short list of conditions that have to hold before anything is scaled, and a direct statement of which ones do not currently hold.
Condition to advance. The diagnostic is complete, and the preconditions are named and agreed in writing.
Sequence
What order the work goes in, and why that order rather than another. A sequence is not a schedule. Each phase is stated together with the condition it depends on, so the reasoning stays inspectable and the plan survives a date moving. Where two workstreams compete for the same scarce capacity, the method says which one yields.
Condition to advance. Every phase names its precondition, and the owner of each precondition accepts it.
Spine
Whether the structural layer is standardized before the visible layer is built on top of it. Process definitions, data definitions and the control environment are the spine. Standardizing them is unglamorous, and it is where most of the value is protected: a platform scaled on inconsistent data, or an integration that defers its controls, accrues a liability that surfaces later at a worse price.
Condition to advance. The structural layer holds under production volume rather than under a pilot.
Run-Rate
Whether the change has reached the P&L, and whether it survives the operator leaving. A change that depends on the person who made it is not finished. The final stage transfers ownership to named internal operators, confirms the economics have reached run-rate rather than forecast, and closes the engagement. Advisory that cannot describe its own exit is a retainer.
Condition to advance. Run-rate confirmed against the baseline, ownership transferred, no residual dependency on the advisor.
Where an established standard is the right reference, the method uses it rather than restating it: the NIST AI Risk Management Framework and ISO/IEC 42001 where AI governance is in scope, APQC’s Process Classification Framework for process taxonomy and benchmarking, ISO 27001 and the NIST Cybersecurity Framework for the control environment, ITIL 4 where service operations are being standardized, and PMBOK principles for governance and benefits realization. For post-merger integration there is no neutral standard. That absence is the reason this method exists.
STAGE ONE · THE READINESS DIAGNOSTIC · 5–10 MINUTES
Twelve Questions.
These twelve questions are the instrument for the first stage. Read them, or answer them. Where AI is the subject, the stage-one work is set out at greater length on the AI readiness assessment page. Answer what you can — a partial response is still useful, and the gaps tell us as much as the answers. The four open-response questions are optional.