Evincia is a technology risk-assessment firm I founded to help organizations understand what modernizing a legacy .NET or SQL Server system will actually cost them in risk before committing to a migration. I wrote a deterministic diagnostic that gathers objective, repeatable evidence straight from the codebase. While much of the industry is racing to point AI at code and let it diagnose, I went the other way: establish the factual evidence first, then let AI help organize the story.
Thirty-five years inside enterprise systems.
"Enterprise systems" is the resume phrase. In practice it means the software behind store checkouts, phone bills, and warehouse shelves: retail, telecom, supply chain, most of it long-lived Microsoft software. I have built systems from scratch, inherited other people's, scaled them well past what they were designed for, and been the person who works out what to do when the architecture stops cooperating.
Most consultants specialize in building the new thing. My background is wider than that. Engineering, architecture, keeping systems running safely once they are live, and the part nobody volunteers for, which is making sure the transition actually goes live and the system still runs the morning after.
These days I work as an advisor, a fractional architect, and a software expert witness. I am based in Atlanta, available on-site across the Southeast or remote. This site is where you engage me directly for that work. Evincia is my firm; its product is a fixed-scope, independent risk report for aging .NET and SQL Server systems.
What I'm building now.
Evincia
Evincia is the firm I am building. Its first product is a fixed-scope health check for aging .NET and SQL Server systems: an automated read of the code that tells you where the real risks are before you commit to modernizing. Think home inspection, but for the software a business runs on.
If you want that specific health check, it lives at evincia.co. Everything else here, the advisory and the fractional work, is just me.
Across telecom, retail, supply chain, and the Microsoft ecosystem.
Read it bottom to top: the Army, then three decades of systems that had to work every day -- checkout lines, employee schedules, phone service for tens of millions.
At Cricket I led over 30 developers across multiple teams. The job was really several jobs at once: team leader, architect, product owner, vendor manager, and hands-on engineer. I was architect of record for the retail store identity and access system, which I helped build from the ground up. AT&T, Cricket's parent, runs the company's one central identity platform: the system of record for who works there and what they are allowed to use. The system managed the store employees and their roles, and provisioned each change -- a hire, a role change, a departure -- to that platform in real time. My team also built a single sign-on application that employees log in with, which checks them against AT&T's platform rather than ours. Roughly two-thirds of my developers worked the consumer side: Cricket's website, cricketwireless.com, on both the front end and the back end. Across all of it I also planned and led migrations of aging monoliths toward microservices, SaaS, and modular monoliths, and helped the organization grow up around the work: Agile and DevOps, CI/CD and Git-based delivery, Infrastructure as Code, cloud-native platforms, automated testing, observability, security and compliance, and, more recently, AI-assisted development.
I worked as an independent .NET consultant, taking on contract engineering and building and hosting websites for Atlanta-area businesses. My clients included Thomson Reuters and Apartments.com, and I was running client systems on Amazon's cloud (EC2) while it was still in beta.
I built and maintained the work-item tracker the whole organization ran on, and I led a team that automated retail logistics -- including inventory re-ordering -- for client headquarters operations.
I was architect of record for Radiant's automotive-care product and led development teams in the Convenience Store division. I also oversaw development across other divisions, including Entertainment (movie theaters) and Food Service (restaurants and fast food).
Airborne and jungle-combat qualified. Ranger School. Germany, Panama, Egypt, and Honduras.
The long version, with the detail, is on LinkedIn.
How I think about old systems.
Systems that have been running for 15 or 20 years carry weight you cannot see in the code. Things get wired to other things nobody wrote down. Delivery pressure shaped the design in ways nobody documented. And the order you change things in matters more than most teams expect when they start.
The point is not to modernize everything. The point is to change what needs changing without breaking what already works.
Three Ways In.
All of it comes down to three ways in. Pick the one that sounds like your situation.
Fractional Architect
The senior architect you bring in a few days a month, when an important .NET or SQL Server system is getting risky to change and the people who built it have moved on. I set direction, review the decisions that are expensive to get wrong, give a straight read on what to modernize and what to leave alone, and stay hands-on enough to be useful. Advisory from the outside, or embedded with your team, depending on the work.
Details below 02 LitigationExpert Witness
Consulting and testifying work on software disputes: failed implementations, disputed deliverables, and arguments about whether a system was built and run correctly. Analyzed by someone who has built and run this kind of system in production, not someone reading the codebase for the first time the week before a deposition.
View practice page 03 AI adoptionAI Engineering Advisor
Independent guidance for engineering leaders adopting AI-assisted development. I use the tools in my own work, and I have spent thirty-five years running the kind of systems they get pointed at. Practical guidance grounded in real software delivery, not hype.
Details belowA senior architect on your team, a few days a month.
Most companies do not need a full-time architect. They need someone senior in the room for the decisions that are expensive to get wrong, and gone again before the payroll line starts to hurt.
That is the job. I set technical direction, review the risky calls, keep a migration honest, and help your team ship without painting itself into a corner. Regional and mid-sized companies included; you do not have to be a Fortune 500 to get my attention.
Where I help
I am not the kind of consultant who shows up, runs a workshop, and leaves you a slide deck. I get into the real system: the code, the database, the decisions already made and the ones still open. Sometimes that is a standing day or two a month; sometimes it is a block of time around one specific decision, or a one-off straight read on what you have: what is actually at risk, what to fix first, what to leave alone. I do not sell the rebuild, so I have no reason to tell you that you need one. Now and then the job is talking someone out of rebuilding a thing that works fine.
Either way, the arrangement should get smaller over time, not bigger. If your team is not handling more of this without me by the end, I am doing it wrong. On-site around metro Atlanta, or remote. The first step is a short call: tell me what is going on, and I will tell you if I can help.
AI can generate code. It cannot generate judgment.
I help engineering leaders adopt AI-assisted development without creating new operational risk. Thirty-five years inside enterprise systems, hands-on with modern AI development tools. For leaders who need practical adoption decisions, not vendor theater.
Most teams are already experimenting with AI-assisted development. Fewer can say where it actually helps, or what guardrails should sit around it. Developers are using AI. Vendors are selling AI. Leadership is being asked for answers.
Generating the code is rarely the hard part. The hard part is deciding what can safely change inside systems that have been running the business for years. I help organizations make those decisions.
One distinction worth making: this is independent advice on how your teams adopt AI-assisted development. It is not an Evincia diagnostic, which is a fixed-scope report that happens to use AI inside its own engine.
How I help
Most AI advisors are either AI specialists with limited experience running enterprise systems, or software practitioners still learning how modern AI tooling behaves. My perspective comes from both sides: thirty-five years building, operating, modernizing, and supporting production systems, and hands-on use of AI development tools, AI agents that carry out multi-step work, and automated code analysis in my own work today. That combination matters.
The biggest AI failures are rarely technical failures. They are failures of judgment, sequencing, governance, and operational understanding.
Typical engagements
Executive AI Readiness Review
A written read on where AI-assisted development fits your teams and systems, where it does not yet, and what to change first.
AI Development Workflow Review
I sit with your actual pipeline: the prompts, the review gates, the tests, and how code actually makes it into the product. You get findings, not a maturity model.
AI Modernization Advisory
For organizations weighing how far AI can take a legacy modernization. You get a sequence: what changes, in what order, and what it must not break.
Ongoing Advisory Support
A standing day or two a month while your team makes the adoption calls. Same shape as the fractional work.
A few observations
A short call is the easiest way.
If something is getting risky (an aging system, a migration you are unsure about, a team that needs senior cover), that is the kind of call I take. A sentence of context in the booking form helps. Not everything has to be business, either. Old colleagues, neighbors, the curious: email works.
LinkedIn linkedin.com/in/jerryharlowPlease sign my guestbook.
Sign the guestbook and your entry waits for approval; approved entries show up here. 1998 presentation, 2026 plumbing.