Decision & Solution Architect

I design the right solution for problems with no obvious answer.

Analytics, process redesign, automation, AI and operating-model change, combined in the right order and measured against a baseline.

The real driver, diagnosed
A sequenced solution, not a tool list
A baseline, a target and a stop rule

Discuss a problem About me

How I approach it

It starts with a simple request.

“We need AI for this.” Up close, it is a tangle of steps, owners and exceptions.

Map how the work really runs.

Then set a baseline: what it costs and what it misses today.

Find the real driver.

Usually not where everyone is pointing. Here, inputs arrive in five formats.

Design a sequence, not a tool.

Fix the inputs, automate the rules, add AI only where judgment remains.

Set the target first.

Illustrative: 12 minutes per case today, a target of 8, a result of 7.

Keep, change or stop.

Results decide. The next problem starts with a baseline.

Experience includesAccentureUnitedHealth GroupNextcare (Allianz Partners)DamanSaba IP

Guides

What are you trying to solve?

Start with the problem that sounds familiar. Each guide takes you from diagnosis to intervention and measurement.

Process and decisions

This process takes too long, and adding people hasn't fixed it.

There may be a process, automation or decision problem underneath the workload.

What does this problem actually need? → AI

We're being asked to use AI, and I'm not sure where it belongs.

Separate rule-based work from judgment, establish the cost of errors, and test against a baseline.

Should this workflow use AI at all? → Working capital

We have too many overdue accounts and not enough capacity to chase them all.

Prioritize by likely recoverability and actionability, not by balance size alone.

Where should collection effort go first? → Capability

We need specialist skills, but I'm not sure another hire is the answer.

Compare recurring demand, utilization, delay and cost per deliverable before committing to headcount.

Hire, contract or access on demand? →

Your problem is not on the list? Contact me

Visual guide

What does this problem actually need?

AI has made more solutions available to everyone, which makes the choice harder. Tick what is true of your problem. Real problems rarely need one thing, so the answer is a sequence.

What is true of the problem? The process is inconsistent, or ownership is unclear We don't yet know what is driving the problem The work is repetitive and follows rules Decisions depend on language, context or expert judgment We need to predict future volume, demand or behavior Limited resources have to be allocated across many options Capability or capacity is the real constraint

Working rules, not a verdict. Every real problem needs judgment on top.

← All guides

Guide

Should this workflow use AI at all?

A way to decide before choosing a tool.

Most “should we use AI?” questions are really two questions: which steps are repeatable, and what a miss costs.

Explore the model: does the tool pay for itself?

A back-of-envelope model for one question: does a tool that saves time but misses slightly more actually pay for itself? Every input is yours. Start by raising the cost of a miss and watch the verdict change.

Cases per month Minutes per case today Time the tool saves per case Miss rate today Miss rate with the tool Cost of one miss Tool running cost per month

Monthly cost today

Monthly cost with the tool

Four questions, in order

Understand: What decision does this workflow feed, and who answers for it?Walk the process as it actually runs, step by step, and mark each step repeatable or judgment-dependent.
Baseline: What does the current process miss, and how much do experts disagree?Measure time per case, misses, false alarms and expert-to-expert agreement before touching anything.
Intervene: What is the smallest step a tool could take over?Pilot where steps are repeatable and measurable. Keep a person on the judgment steps.
Measure: Does it beat the baseline on the same cases?Compare misses, false alarms, review time and how often reviewers overturn the output. Agree the stop condition first.

Where people go wrong

Common move	Why it fails	What I do instead
Start from a tool	The tool defines the problem, so the pilot proves the tool, not the need	Start from the decision and the cost of a miss
Test on positive examples only	It rewards tools that over-flag	Include cases where the right answer is nothing
Report accuracy	It flatters, and hides review time and overturned results	Report misses, false alarms and reviewer overturn rate

← All guides

Guide

A large receivables portfolio: where should effort go first?

Why the biggest balances are not the whole story.

Balance size alone is rarely enough to prioritize a receivables portfolio. It ignores whether a balance can be collected at all.

Explore the model: ranking a simulated portfolio

A simulated portfolio of 2,000 clients with invented balances and ages. Both rules get the same limited capacity, and the bars show how much recoverable value each captures. Move the sliders to see how much the assumptions matter.

Clients you can work 200 How much more likely the largest balances are to be disputed 30%

Work the largest balances first

Work the highest expected recovery first

Four questions, in order

Understand: Which balances can anyone actually act on?Separate disputed, unallocated and unreachable balances from those that are simply unpaid, and find out who owns each.
Baseline: Where do recoveries and effort go today?Record recoveries by age band and account size, open items per account, and where the team spends its time. Read the long tail separately.
Intervene: Which segments need different treatment?Segment on value, age, open items, payment behavior and actionability. Give each a treatment and an owner. Three or four treatments is the most a team can run.
Measure: Did the segment move, or did the market?Track recovery rate, time to resolve and effort per unit recovered against a comparison segment left untouched.

Where people go wrong

Common move	Why it fails	What I do instead
Work the largest balances first	Large balances can be disproportionately affected by disputes, reconciliation issues or concentration	Rank by expected recoverable value, not balance
Treat the tail as one block	Small balances compound, but not equally	Segment the tail and automate the low-action part
Report total collected	It moves with seasonality and the economy	Compare against an untouched segment

← All guides

Guide

Hire, contract or access on demand?

Match how you buy specialist capability to the shape of the demand.

The cheapest rate is rarely the cheapest model. The shape of the demand decides.

Explore the model: when does a permanent hire pay off?

A break-even model for one question: at what volume does a permanent hire beat buying the same hours on demand? Lower the hours needed and see how quickly the answer changes.

Specialist hours needed per year Annual cost of a permanent hire Contract rate per hour

Permanent hire, per year

On demand, per year

Four questions, in order

Understand: How often does this work arise, and how predictable is it?Separate skills needed every week from skills needed a few times a year.
Baseline: What does the current model really cost?Count salaries, idle time, waiting for the specialist, rework, and the cost per deliverable of anything outsourced.
Intervene: Which part is recurring and strategic?Keep that close. Flex episodic or deliverable-based work through contracts or on-demand access, with the handover planned before work starts.
Measure: Is it faster and cheaper per deliverable?Track cost per deliverable, utilization of permanent roles, time to start and rework.

Where people go wrong

Common move	Why it fails	What I do instead
Compare hourly rates	It ignores idle time and delay	Compare utilization and cost per deliverable
Hire for a skill that feels critical	Critical is not the same as recurring	Test how often the work really arises
Outsource without a handover	Knowledge leaves with the contractor	Plan documentation and handover first

← All guides

About

James Ratac

Decision & Solution Architect based in Dubai.

How I work.

I am an enterprise analytics and decision-intelligence leader with 15+ years across healthcare, insurance and professional services.

I started in analytical roles focused on understanding what happened and why. Over time the work expanded into deciding what should change, designing the process or system around that decision, and measuring whether the intervention worked.

Today I work across analytics, AI, operations, data architecture and transformation. I treat data as evidence for a decision, not as the end product.

ReportWhat happened?

ExplainWhy did it happen?

DecideWhat should we do?

RedesignWhat process or system needs to change?

Velta Advisory

Selected independent advisory, analytics and transformation work is developed separately through Velta Advisory.

Visit Velta Advisory

Contact

Interested in the work?

For professional conversations, collaboration or selected advisory work, write to me directly.

Email →LinkedIn →Resume / CV →Velta Advisory →

I design the right solution for problems with no obvious answer.

It starts with a simple request.

Map how the work really runs.

Find the real driver.

Design a sequence, not a tool.

Set the target first.

Keep, change or stop.

What are you trying to solve?

This process takes too long, and adding people hasn't fixed it.

We're being asked to use AI, and I'm not sure where it belongs.

We have too many overdue accounts and not enough capacity to chase them all.

We need specialist skills, but I'm not sure another hire is the answer.

What does this problem actually need?

Should this workflow use AI at all?

Explore the model: does the tool pay for itself?

Four questions, in order

Where people go wrong

A large receivables portfolio: where should effort go first?

Explore the model: ranking a simulated portfolio

Four questions, in order

Where people go wrong

Hire, contract or access on demand?

Explore the model: when does a permanent hire pay off?

Four questions, in order

Where people go wrong

James Ratac

How I work.

Velta Advisory

Interested in the work?

Interested in working together?