Board-Level · Business & Technology Alignment · Independent

Most technology decisions
are also business decisions.
Very few are treated that way.

I work directly with CFOs, CTOs, and COOs when technology decisions become expensive, urgent, or politically noisy. Thirty years in the room. One mandate: yours.

Request a Conversation What this looks like in practice →
Shahar M. Raz
Founded 2006 · Independent
30+
Years in the room
C-suite
The only level I work at
2006
Practice founded
One
Party I answer to
CFO

"I approve the spend but I cannot defend the strategy to the board."

CTO

"I know the direction. I need someone to validate it before I take it to the board."

COO

"We are scaling fast and I am not confident the technology foundation will hold."

Strategic Clarity

The few decisions that matter, and a north-star direction the board can stand behind.

Operational Confidence

Roadmaps and an operating model that make execution predictable, not a recurring negotiation.

Value Economics

Spend that earns its place. Impact today and resilience for the future.

"Finally, someone on your side of the table."

The Work

Six ways the gap between
business and technology
shows up in practice.

The decisions that don't get made well are rarely technical failures. They are alignment failures: between what the business needs, what technology can deliver, and who is in the room when the call is made.

These are not six separate offerings. They are six expressions of one engagement model: closing the gap between where the business is going and what technology is set up to deliver.

CFO · CTO · COO

Technology Strategy & Business Alignment

The strategy your technology serves should belong to the business, not the other way around. Roadmap development, investment planning, architectural trade-offs, all anchored to where the organization is going, stress-tested against where it actually is.

A technology strategy your CFO can explain, your CTO can execute, and your COO can hold the organization to
CTO · COO

Strategic Roadmap & Planning

A roadmap that holds up after the deck is presented. Long-term planning that maps real business objectives to the technology decisions required to reach them, with the discipline to keep execution aligned with the original intent as the organization evolves.

→ Direction that survives contact with reality
CFO · CTO · COO

Technology Strategy for Transitions

When the business context changes, technology strategy has to move first. M&A, divestiture, rapid growth, market entry. Each creates a moment where the gap between business and technology either closes or widens. I work with leadership to build the technology strategy for what the business is becoming.

→ Technology that enables the transition instead of surviving it
CFO · CTO

Vendor & Commercial Strategy

Working with clients to define the negotiation strategy, set the target outcomes, and lead or support the commercial process with the vendors. No referral relationship with any provider. The position we take at the table answers to your business case, not theirs.

→ Commercial decisions made on your terms, not theirs
CFO · CTO · COO

Executive Advisory

The perspective no internal team can offer, because they all answer to someone. An ongoing independent seat at the table. Major decisions, board presentations, strategic pivots. The question I answer is always the same: what would I recommend if your result were the only result that mattered?

→ Clarity before the commitment, not after
CFO · CTO

FinOps Executive Alignment

Your FinOps team is only as effective as the mandate you give them. I am not a FinOps consultant. I am the advisor who ensures your FinOps function is built right, pointed in the right direction, and answering to strategy, not to dashboards.

→ FinOps that produces decisions, not just reports

About

Most expensive decisions
happen in the gap between
business strategy and
technology strategy.

I am Shahar M. Raz. Since founding Raz Tech Strategy in 2006, I have worked at the level where technology decisions and business decisions converge, advising CFOs who need to own a strategy they didn't build, CTOs who need an independent voice before they take a direction to the board, and COOs who need the technology roadmap to actually map to the business.

Thirty years in technology leadership means I have been in enough rooms to know how the wrong decisions get made. Not through incompetence. Through misalignment. The business moving one direction while technology moves another. Commitments made without the right framing. Investments that make sense inside the technology org and nowhere else.

My work spans technology strategy, roadmap alignment, major decision advisory and, where it is part of the strategic picture, vendor and commercial strategy. I work independently, with no provider relationships and no interest in any outcome other than my client's.

I work selectively. I do not scale. The measure of a good engagement is not what I contribute while I am there. It is what the organization can do, decide, and defend after I am gone.

2006
Practice founded
30+
Years in technology leadership
Multi-million
Technology decisions at organizational scale
C-suite
The only level where I operate
Zero
Vendor or provider interests I represent

"The decisions made without the right person in the room are the ones that cost the most to undo."

Shahar M. Raz  ·  Raz Tech Strategy

Complete independence. My practice does not accept vendor commissions, reseller margins, or referral fees from any provider. When vendor and commercial relationships are part of an engagement, I advise on them with no interest in any outcome other than yours.

Selectivity

You are likely in the
right place if one of
these sounds familiar.

I work with a small number of organizations at a time. Not because the work is exclusive, but because it has to be deep to be useful. The engagements that produce the best results share three conditions.

01
The decision on the table is significant enough that getting it wrong has real consequences.

Not every technology decision needs a strategic advisor. The ones that do are the ones where the business implications extend well beyond the technology team, where the cost of misalignment shows up in the P&L, not just the architecture.

02
The people who need to make the decision are the people in the room.

I work directly with CFOs, CTOs, COOs, and CEOs, not through layers or coordinators. The engagement only works if the executive sponsor is an active participant, because that is where the decisions actually live.

03
There is a real opportunity for the outcome to be exceptional, not just improved.

I take engagements where my specific experience, the intersection of business strategy, technology direction, and executive decision-making, can produce a result that would not have been reached otherwise. Incremental is not the goal.

Before the engagement begins, both sides agree on exactly what it covers, what it produces, and what it requires. The work that follows is focused because the foundation is set. Initial findings and early direction are delivered within weeks, not held until a final report. These engagements are approved and led by the executive who needs the outcome, not routed through procurement or delegated to a coordinator. The question worth asking before we speak is not what this costs. It is what the last misaligned decision at this scale cost you, and whether the next one is already forming.

If you recognize your situation in the above, the next step is a direct conversation. No intake form. No discovery call with a coordinator. A direct exchange to determine whether there is a genuine fit.

Get in Touch

When the technology question
is really a business question:
that is the conversation I am here for.

I set aside time for direct conversations with executives facing a decision that sits at the intersection of business strategy and technology. No intake form. No coordinator. A direct exchange to determine whether there is a genuine fit.

contact@razts.com

Shahar reads and responds to every message directly.

Intake for new engagements is periodic, not continuous. The right time to have a first conversation is before the next window, not after a decision has already been made.

LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/shaharraz  ·  Israel-based · Global engagements

Startups

A limited slot, periodically.

Early-stage companies may not yet have the structure for a full strategic engagement. But a single well-advised decision at the right moment can set the trajectory for years. I periodically open one paid, focused slot for a startup at a critical decision point.

If you believe your situation warrants one of these slots, contact me with a short explanation of the decision you are facing and why you think I am the right person to help.

Mentorship

Pro bono, by selection.

Each year I reserve a small number of pro bono mentoring engagements for pre-Series A founders, newly appointed cloud-strategy leaders, and high-potential engineering managers preparing for executive roles.

These slots are awarded on fit and potential impact, not first-come. They require full commitment from the mentee. Contact me with a concise outline of your challenge and your case for why I am the right mentor.