Most of the studios I talk to right now are fighting two things at once: the work they were built to do, and the work they’re going to need to do twelve months from now.
Most of the playbooks they’re reading were written for one or the other. None of them were written for both.
So we write yours, in ten weeks. Your team finds the one thing actually jamming it, changes it, stops something to make room, and runs a real decision through the new way of working. At the end you have a way of deciding that has already been tested on one of your own calls.
It starts with a single week. You decide on the other nine once you’ve read what it found.
I’m Alberto Venditti. For fifteen years I’ve worked as a creative director, product partner, and strategist on problems that don’t come with an established playbook. Digital twins and pre-demolition AI/ML pipelines at Skanska. ML-driven gameplay tracking multiple sclerosis progression for Novartis and Microsoft Research. Persistent spatial audio AR inside the Galleria Borghese. Mixed-reality tooling to design the Virgin Galactic spaceport interior. Ray-Ban Meta smart-glasses workflows at NASA. Right now I’m embedded with the product and pipeline teams of a major Indian VFX studio, using AI and a lot of UX to give artists more space and pull weeks out of blockbuster productions.
That last bit is the part most clients want to talk about: AI, generative tooling, the sudden collapse of cost and time. Fair enough. I’ll talk about it with you. But the more useful conversation is usually the one underneath.
You don’t have a tooling problem. You have a decision problem. Tools change every six months; the way you decide what to build doesn’t have to.
I don’t run the keyboard. I help you decide what to do, in what order, with what trade-offs. Your team executes. Ten weeks is a real commitment, and asking for it up front would mean committing big before either of us knows enough. So you buy one week first, and decide on the rest once we both do.
What the ten weeks actually look like
You’re being asked to pay £2,500 for something you can’t see, from someone whose client work sits under NDA. So here is the thing itself, day by day.
- Monday. I interview your senior team (strategy, product, UX) separately. Same questions to each. Separately is the point: where they disagree with each other is already a finding.
- Tuesday and Wednesday. I go through your product the way a customer does, and through your recent build/no-build decisions the way an auditor does. Who decided, on what evidence, what shipped.
- Thursday. One session with the whole senior team. I read back where you said you are, where I think you are, and where those two disagree. Then what the nine weeks after would look like for you.
- Friday. The written diagnostic and the gap analysis land in your inbox. Yours either way. Read it, then decide.
If you carry on, the nine weeks after run in three blocks, two sessions each.
- Weeks 2–4. Your team finds out what’s actually true inside the one thing that’s jamming you. Not my read. Reconstructed from your own numbers. At the end: the ground truth, written down. If it doesn’t contradict something everyone believed, we haven’t dug far enough.
- Weeks 5–7. You design the change and decide what stops to make room for it. I pressure-test it until it breaks, then we repair it. At the end: the change, an owner, and a stop-list with the cost of stopping named.
- Weeks 8–10. One real decision, still undecided, goes through the new process while I watch. Then we fix what broke. At the end: a way of deciding you have seen work, not just read about.
The work happens between the sessions, not in them. Your team does it. That’s what you’re signing up for.
What’s in the diagnostic
The whole sprint runs on one instrument: nine cells, made of three stages (grasp, build, scale) against three disciplines (strategy, product, UX). Every studio sits somewhere different in each. One of the nine is the thing actually jamming you right now, and in my experience it is rarely the one the leadership team names first.
The document is organised the same way:
- Where you said you are. Your senior team’s own reading of the nine cells, and where they contradicted each other.
- Where you actually are. My reading of the same nine cells, with the evidence for each.
- The divergence. The gap between those two readings, cell by cell, and what each gap is costing you.
- The bottleneck. The one cell to fix first, and the argument for why it beats the other eight.
- What to stop doing. The work currently absorbing the capacity you’d need to fix it.
- What to do next. In order, with the trade-offs named, sized for your team rather than mine.
That’s the deliverable. No page count promised, no deck, no workshop photos. It’s week one’s; the other nine produce the rest.
Who this is for
- Studios and agencies whose senior team can feel the next wave coming and want a sober second pair of eyes before they commit budget.
- Studios between fifty and three hundred people. Big enough that the decision has real consequences, small enough that one person can still change it.
- Production houses and creative shops where the margin has collapsed and “let’s adopt AI” is the wrong-shaped answer to the actual problem.
- Leaders ready to execute, not investigate.
Who this is not for
- Anyone shopping for cheap delivery. I don’t render, design, or code at the keyboard. I rebuild strategy.
- Studios that are “curious” about AI, or anything else, but aren’t willing to change how they work.
- Founders who want a deck, a babysitter, or someone to perform expertise on a stage. I provide unfashionable honesty and a sharp plan. You execute it.
Past clients & collaborators
To be precise: this track record is mine, fifteen years of it across these teams, not VENALBE’s. VENALBE is how I package that experience so you can buy it in pieces.
Now for the part most people skip past
This is expensive.
£2,500 buys the first week: Diagnose, a structured sprint to map where you actually are on strategy, product, and UX, not where the deck says you are. Fixed scope, fixed price. One week, and you’ll know exactly where you stand.
£4,500 buys the nine weeks after it. You decide after you’ve read the diagnostic, not before.
Why not stop at the document? A diagnostic is a document. Documents get read, agreed with, and filed. What’s being diagnosed is usually how you decide. And a document has never changed that in any company I’ve worked in, including when I was the one writing it.
If what you want is a deck for the board, pay someone else. If you want clarity on what’s actually worth building next, and the discipline to stop building everything else, then start with the week.
What happens when you send the form
One form. I read every submission personally. That’s why I ask the awkward questions.
Three studios per intake. I run all three myself. That’s the constraint, and it’s the whole of it. This is the first intake run as a ten-week programme.
No chasing. No discovery calls. You’ll hear back inside two business days, either way. If it’s a no, you’ll get an actual reason rather than a template. If it’s a yes, I’ll send over the paperwork and the start date.
Start here
— Alberto
P.S. If your team is currently burning more than £15k a month on consultants, decks, and “alignment”, and nothing has shipped, that’s the conversation we’re going to have.