An independent review of engineering capability, architecture, and operational maturity for founders, CEOs, CTOs, and boards.
A technical health check is a structured, independent assessment of a software company's engineering organization, technology platform, and operating practices. It is designed for situations where a transaction is not imminent but where leadership, investors, or a board wants an honest outside perspective.
Health checks are not audits. They are practical reviews conducted with appropriate access to the team and the codebase, focused on identifying what is working well, what carries risk, and what should change.
The output is a set of findings and recommendations that are actionable by a leadership team, not a list of abstract concerns.
Is the platform architecture appropriate for where the company is going, or are structural issues accumulating that will slow down growth?
Does the team have the skills, structure, and leadership to execute the product roadmap and respond to scale?
What has accumulated, where is it concentrated, and what will it cost to address relative to the benefit?
Are we releasing reliably, testing adequately, and operating in a way that supports a growing business?
What security exposure, key person dependencies, or operational fragility would concern an investor or acquirer?
Given what we found, what are the most important technical investments, and in what order should they be addressed?
Health checks are scoped to the specific needs of the engagement. A typical assessment covers:
Health check deliverables are calibrated to audience. Boards and investors receive executive-level summaries. Engineering teams receive actionable findings with recommended next steps.
Technical due diligence is conducted on behalf of an external party, typically an investor or acquirer, to inform a transaction decision. It is structured for confidentiality, deal timing, and investment committee reporting.
A technical health check is conducted on behalf of the company itself, typically for internal leadership or a board. It is designed to inform operational decisions, investment priorities, and preparation for future events, not a specific transaction.
Both are rigorous, independent assessments. The audience, purpose, and output framing differ. Willowbark is experienced in both contexts.