Microsoft cloud service
Cost & Governance
Clearer Azure cost attribution, a prioritized optimization backlog, and documented controls for ongoing review.
All services
When this fits
Signs you need this.
- Your Azure bill has grown and no single person can explain why.
- Finance and engineering do not share a reliable explanation of the invoice.
- Dev and test resources run around the clock with no schedule.
- Reservations were bought once and never revisited.
- Resource ownership and cost allocation are incomplete or inconsistent.
First
What we assess.
- Spend by subscription, resource type, available owner, and agreed business grouping.
- Compute, SQL, and storage SKUs that are oversized for their real utilization.
- Reservation and savings-plan coverage against actual usage patterns.
- Idle and orphaned resources — stopped-but-billing disks, unused IPs, dev VMs.
- Storage tiers and whether lifecycle policies are moving cold data down.
Then
What we implement.
- Approved right-sizing or cleanup changes supported by utilization and dependency review.
- Commitment options with documented assumptions and break-even analysis.
- Lifecycle or scheduling controls for agreed storage and non-production resources.
- Budgets, alerts, and policy controls included in scope.
- A cost-allocation and reporting approach based on available ownership data.
Deliverables
What you get.
- Azure spend baseline and cost-driver map
- Prioritized optimization backlog
- Commitment options with break-even analysis
- Approved lifecycle, scheduling, or cleanup changes
- Budget, alert, and policy-control plan
- Cost-allocation and reporting design
Working agreement
What the engagement requires and where it ends.
Often begins as a paid fixed-scope assessment. Approved remediation can follow as fixed-scope implementation or ongoing fractional engineering capacity.
Client inputs
- Billing-reader access or approved cost exports for the review period
- Resource ownership and business-allocation information where available
- Utilization data and workload owners for proposed changes
- Commitment, budget, change-window, and procurement constraints
Explicit exclusions
- Guaranteed savings or a universal reduction percentage
- Unapproved production changes or commitment purchases
- Cloud billing disputes, accounting advice, or software-license procurement
Handoff
- Cost baseline, assumptions, and prioritized findings
- Decision log for approved and deferred changes
- Implemented control artifacts included in scope
- Ownership model and recommended review cadence
Stack
Technologies.
Microsoft Cost ManagementAzure ReservationsAzure Savings PlansAzure AdvisorAzure PolicyBudgets & AlertsStorage Lifecycle Management
Technical depth
Review the approach before you contact us.
Questions
Frequently asked.
- Will right-sizing risk breaking production?
- Changes are proposed against real utilization data and staged so you approve each one. We prioritize low-risk wins — idle resources, over-provisioned dev, unattached disks — before touching anything on a critical path.
- Should we commit to 1-year or 3-year reservations?
- It depends on how stable the workload is. We model both against your actual usage history and show the break-even for each, so the commitment matches the confidence you have in keeping that resource running.
- How do the savings hold after the engagement ends?
- Sustained improvement depends on ownership and review, not a one-time cleanup. The engagement can establish budgets, alerts, policies, allocation rules, and a review cadence; your team then owns that operating process unless ongoing support is separately scoped.
Ready to start?
Start with a focused discovery conversation about the environment, pressure, access, and outcome. Pricing is provided after that conversation or a paid assessment when more evidence is required.