How we compare
Elnova vs. a Traditional AI Consultancy
"AI consultancy" covers a wide range of engagements. The distinction that actually matters isn't size or price, it's whether the engagement is built to produce a working system or a recommendation about one.
| Dimension | Elnova | Traditional AI consultancy |
|---|---|---|
| Discovery process | A paid audit, 2-3 weeks, talking to the people doing the actual work | A strategy deck built from stakeholder interviews with management, rarely the front-line team |
| Deliverable | A ranked list of problems, a cost breakdown, and a build proposal | A strategy deck and a roadmap, often without a build attached |
| What happens if nothing's worth fixing | We say so and stop. The audit fee still applies, no build proposal follows | A recommendation gets made anyway, because the engagement is scoped to produce one |
| Who builds it | The same team that ran the audit | Often handed to a separate implementation partner, or your own team |
| Pricing model | Fixed-fee audit, credited toward the build if you proceed | Time and materials, scope creep common |
Choose Elnova when
You already know something is broken and want it found, prioritized, and fixed by the same people, not strategized about by one team and handed to another.
Choose Traditional AI consultancy when
You need boardroom-level strategy across an entire portfolio of initiatives, not one prioritized fix. A traditional consultancy's breadth may serve that better than a build-focused audit.
Still not sure which fits?
That is usually where the audit starts. Two to three weeks, fixed fee, no pitch deck.