When companies commission a Lock-In Map
Something just happened.
A component just went EOL.
And you don't know yet how deep the redesign goes.
Your Chinese supplier raised prices >10% this quarter.
And you suspect they know exactly how locked-in you are.
A new EU regulation just changed your disclosure requirements.
CSRD, Battery Regulation, or Digital Product Passport.
You're entering a fundraising or M&A cycle.
And supply chain due diligence is going to come up.
A geopolitical or tariff shift is forcing you to model alternatives.
And your team has no structured way to do it.
AI is reshaping your hardware roadmap.
And it's hard to tell what's real, what's hype, and which parts of the shift you can actually capitalize on.
If any of these apply this quarter — that's the moment to commission the audit, not after the redesign starts.
Something has been happening for years.
Your supplier relationships are >5 years old and have never been re-tested.
And nobody on the team can remember why you chose them.
Your engineering team flies to the same factory twice a year — and has for as long as anyone remembers.
That’s not a relationship. That’s an unwritten dependency.
You have one supplier whose name comes up in every quality, pricing, and delivery conversation.
You’ve adapted around them. You haven’t priced what that adaptation costs.
Every cost-down conversation ends with “we looked at alternatives once, but…”
That sentence is the lock-in. The audit makes it specific.
You inherited the supplier list when you took over the company — and you’ve never opened it.
What worked for the founder may not be what works for the next chapter.
You couldn’t tell a board member, today, what your single largest supply chain exposure is.
Most owners can’t. The audit is how you find out before someone asks.
If the first row applies, it's high time. If the second row applies and nothing has happened yet, it's exactly the right moment.
Not sure if any of this applies to you?
A 30-minute conversation. We walk through your supplier picture together — your top dependencies, where the lock-in sits, what would and wouldn’t be answered by an audit.
Optionally, share a few specific components or a BOM. After the call, you’ll receive a one-page Lock-In Snapshot — your supply chain triaged on switching cost, concentration, and regulatory exposure, with a clear verdict on whether an audit is the right next step. Yours to keep, whether you commission an engagement or not.
No pitch. No proposal unless you ask for one.
Book the conversation →The system in 4 steps
Each engagement follows the same structured path. Your audit uses the steps that apply to your product — Step 2 adapts to your codebase or skips entirely if your product is hardware-only.
BOM ingestion & dependency mapping
Components classified by single-source risk, regulatory exposure, and substitution complexity.
I take your bill of materials in whatever format you keep it — Excel, ERP export, PDF — and work through it line by line using my own analysis tooling. Each component gets scored on switching cost, regulatory exposure (RoHS, REACH, Battery Regulation, US export controls), and supplier concentration. Components with hidden dependencies — including AI accelerators, NPUs, and inference modules where the lock-in is as much about the model as the silicon — get flagged for deeper review.
Firmware & software lock-in analysis (when applicable)
Where your code creates supplier coupling that the BOM doesn't show.
If your product runs firmware or software that touches the supplier's ecosystem, I audit the codebase for vendor-specific integrations, proprietary protocols, and architectural choices that prevent substitution — including embedded ML models, vendor-specific inference runtimes, and AI APIs that quietly tie your product to a specific provider. Output: a prioritized refactoring map with engineering-hour estimates for each unlock. If your product is hardware-only, this step is skipped and the audit moves directly to Step 3.
Hardware architecture review
Remote analysis or on-site inspection of the device.
I review the physical architecture for fragility a BOM can't see — tolerances, integration choices, manufacturability decisions that lock you to a specific factory. Most engagements run remotely from documentation and photos; on-site review is included in the Extended tier when warranted.
Supplier engagement (when warranted)
Direct conversation with your Chinese suppliers, in Mandarin, on-site if needed.
When the analysis surfaces a specific supplier issue worth resolving directly — pricing leverage, technical clarification, alternative qualification — I engage your suppliers in their language, on their ground. This step is optional and scoped to the China tier.
What you receive
Every Lock-In Map I deliver follows the same structure: a findings document with named exposures, prioritized by remediation cost.
The dependency table
Every component, supplier, and code path that creates lock-in, with severity scoring.
The remediation estimate
For each high-severity dependency, the engineering hours and capital required to break it.
The substitution map
Qualified alternative suppliers and components, with the technical work required to switch.
Lock-In Map findings document (redacted sample)
Why this audit, by this person
Former Deep-Tech CTO with software, AI, and hardware-systems background
I've shipped hardware-software products from prototype to production scale, with a background that spans software architecture, machine learning, and leading hardware-software product organizations as both CTO and managing director. I read your firmware and your AI integrations like an architect, not a sourcing agent — which means I find the lock-in your suppliers built quietly, not just the ones on your risk register. It also means I can tell you which of the AI shifts hitting your roadmap are real engineering opportunities and which are noise.
Mandarin-fluent, on-the-ground in China
I work in Mandarin and spend significant time on the ground in China. I read the technical documentation your suppliers don't translate, and I understand how Chinese ODMs and component vendors actually behave — not how they describe themselves in English.
Senior judgment, supported by purpose-built tooling
I've built my own tooling for this kind of audit — a structured way of working through BOMs, classifying dependencies, and surfacing patterns I'd otherwise miss. Each engagement runs through the same disciplined process, which is why findings across audits are comparable to each other and grounded in evidence rather than instinct. The tooling is mine; the judgment about what matters is what you're hiring.
The offer
Five tiers. Fixed price, fixed timeline, named deliverable. Backed by a guarantee most consultants won't write.
Lock-In Map · Focus
A focused diagnostic on a single component, supplier, or contractual relationship — or a small BOM of up to 10 line items. You receive a tightly-scoped findings document covering switching cost, regulatory exposure, and one named substitution path with a remediation cost estimate. Best when you already know the question — this audit answers it with evidence, in a week, at a price point where the answer alone is worth the engagement.
Best for evaluating a specific supplier or product before committing to a broader audit, or scoping the depth of a possible substitution before engineering work begins.
Book a 30-min call →Lock-In Map · Comprehensive
The full structured Lock-In Map across your complete bill of materials and supplier architecture. Every component, supplier, and contractual exposure scored. Cluster patterns surfaced — places where multiple dependencies share a single root cause and a single remediation. Prioritized by remediation cost.
Best for companies whose supply chain has accumulated complexity over years, where a structured external audit is overdue, and where the deliverable needs to be defensible to engineering, procurement, and leadership in the same document.
A document you can hand to your board, your investors, your engineering team, or your next supplier negotiation — that names exactly where you're exposed, ranked by what it would cost to fix.
Book a 30-min call →Lock-In Map · Extended
Everything in Comprehensive, with two things the lower tiers can't reach:
Open access to your internal stakeholders during the engagement window. Engineering, procurement, firmware, quality, leadership — whoever the audit needs. No conversation budget, no scoped interviews. The audit captures the knowledge your team has built but never written down — distributed across people, not consolidated in one place.
One structured supplier engagement. Direct conversation with a named supplier of your choice, in Mandarin if needed — scoped to a specific clarification or negotiation goal, whether pricing leverage, technical clarity, alternative qualification, or a contractual question you've been unable to resolve in English.
Best for companies where the audit is going to inform a board-level decision, fundraising round, or M&A process — and the cost of being wrong about a key supplier is meaningfully larger than the engagement fee.
*The guarantee that applies to Focus, Standard, and Comprehensive doesn't apply here — at this scope, the value is in the depth and access, not in a single quantifiable finding.*
Specialty engagements
Lock-In Map · Standard
A structured findings document covering your bill of materials and supplier architecture across up to 30 line items. Every component, supplier, and contractual exposure scored for switching cost, regulatory risk, and concentration. Each high-severity dependency comes with a remediation estimate — engineering hours, capital, qualified alternatives.
A document you can hand to your engineering team or your next supplier negotiation — that names exactly where you're exposed, ranked by what it would cost to fix.
Book a 30-min call →Lock-In Map · China
Everything in Extended, plus on-site supplier audit in China — factory inspection, technical conversations conducted in Mandarin, and qualification of alternative suppliers on the ground.
Best for companies where the dependency analysis points clearly at a specific Chinese supplier or factory that needs direct, in-person engagement to resolve.
Request a proposal →If the audit doesn't surface at least one substitution or remediation opportunity worth more than the engagement fee, you don't pay.
The Lock-In Map is built on a simple bet: that any hardware company sourcing from China with a meaningful BOM has at least one dependency that's costing them more than the engagement fee to keep — and that a structured audit will find it.
How the guarantee works
- —The engagement letter names the scope. You pay 50% on signature, 50% on findings delivery.
- —At delivery, you receive the Lock-In Map and a walkthrough with your team.
- —If the findings don't surface at least one substitution or remediation opportunity quantified at more than the engagement fee, the second 50% is waived and the first 50% is refunded.
- —If the findings surface the opportunity but you disagree with the analysis, I revise the document at no additional cost until the scope is genuinely addressed — or refund the engagement.
Why I can offer this
Because in every audit I've run, the dependencies have been there. You've been paying for them quietly, every quarter, in margin you can't trace. The audit makes them visible. Once they're visible, the value is straightforward.
What this means for you
The financial risk of commissioning the Lock-In Map is structurally lower than the financial risk of not commissioning it. You either get findings worth more than the fee, or you get the fee back. There is no third outcome.
Book a 30-min call →Guarantee applies to Focus, Standard, and Comprehensive tiers.
After the Lock-In Map, most clients commission follow-on work — a Substitution Roadmap to execute on the findings, or ongoing Implementation Support. The audit is the entry point, not the relationship.
China is not a yes-or-no
decision. It is a design decision.
Chinese manufacturing offers real cost and speed advantages — but it also introduces IP exposure, geopolitical risk, regulatory complexity (EU CRA, RED Directive), and deep supplier dependency. The right answer is rarely "all in" or "get out." It is a structured decision about what belongs in China, what does not, and how to architect the system so that the answer can change without breaking everything.
I bring something most advisors cannot: the ability to engage directly in Mandarin with Chinese engineering teams, read the full technical documentation (not just the translated summary), and navigate supplier relationships without a middleman — while applying the same analytical rigour to the business, regulatory, and geopolitical trade-offs that determine whether China is the right choice for each part of your system.
of global cellular IoT modules are Chinese-made — a dependency most companies have not consciously chosen
of Chinese component documentation exists only in Mandarin — inaccessible to most Western engineering teams
and RED Directive now impose security and compliance obligations on components sourced from any geography
Is your situation in scope?
This audit is for you if:
You're a hardware or industrial company sourcing components, subassemblies, or finished products from China
You have something specific to analyze — a bill of materials, a single component decision, a supplier you're evaluating, or a small-product import
You suspect — or already know — that one or more suppliers hold meaningful leverage over your product
You want a structured, written analysis you can show your board, your investors, or your own engineering team
If you’re not sure yet which of these applies — start with the Snapshot. That’s what it’s for.
This audit is not the right fit if:
You're looking for general "China strategy" advice without a specific product or component to analyze (I work from artefacts, not opinions)
You need an immediate procurement decision in the next 7 days (the audit takes 1–4 weeks depending on scope; faster than that isn't structured analysis)
You're hoping for an introduction to alternative suppliers without analysis of the underlying lock-in (a sourcing agent is the right next step, not me)
A case in evidence
The Scanner Swap
A Lock-In Map audit surfaced a 25% landed-cost reduction on the most expensive scanned component, and roughly €20k of avoided software spend.
Selected Feedback
"Sebastian conducted a scalability audit of our systems and supply chain and helped us define a development and procurement roadmap aligned with our financial constraints. He identified a better-fit hardware component and supplier in China, projected to save tens of thousands of euros at scale, and supported the efficient integration into our software stack."
Tobias Finé
CEO, Be-In GmbH · Germany
"Sebastian combines deep technical understanding with strong system-level thinking across software, hardware, and global supply chains. He consistently demonstrated excellent analytical skills and the ability to communicate complex topics clearly across engineering and executive teams."
Steve Campbell
CTO (retired), Western Digital · USA
"Sebastian led the implementation of a cloud-based platform with integrated edge devices for our municipality. He coordinated across software, hardware, and stakeholder groups and successfully delivered a system that operates reliably at scale. His ability to translate complex technical requirements into practical solutions was particularly valuable."
Alexander Scheutz
Mayor, European Municipality (Digital Infrastructure Project) · Austria
How an engagement runs
30-minute call
We discuss your situation, your product, your suppliers. Optionally you share a few components or a BOM, and you receive a one-page Lock-In Snapshot of your supply chain afterwards. If the audit isn’t the right fit, I’ll tell you — and the Snapshot is yours to keep regardless. If it is, we agree the tier and the timeline.
Mutual NDA and engagement letter
Fixed scope, fixed price, fixed timeline, named deliverable. Standard terms; my engagement letter is two pages.
Data handover, stakeholder conversations, and analysis
You send the BOM and any supplier documentation, and optionally give me access to the codebase (read-only repo access is fine). I run the analysis over the agreed window, with weekly progress notes and the scheduled stakeholder conversations woven in. Each conversation is scoped to a specific question — not an open-ended interview — so it stays tight on your team's time.
Findings delivery and walkthrough
You receive the written Lock-In Map document and a walkthrough with your team. Follow-on engagements (Substitution Roadmap, Implementation Support) are scoped separately if you want them.
Data handling
Your BOM, your code, and your supplier information stay confidential. I retain anonymized analytical patterns for methodology development; identifying data is destroyed at engagement close.
If the findings don't address the agreed scope
I correct them at no additional cost — and the engagement is covered by the guarantee above.
Frequently asked
questions.
Question not covered? Write to me →
The first conversation is free.
30 minutes. Your situation, your product, your suppliers. By the end of the call, you’ll have a one-page Lock-In Snapshot — sketched live or sent shortly afterwards, depending on what you’ve shared. Yours to keep, whether the audit is the right next step for you or not.
Dependency patterns from real hardware audits — occasionally, by email.
One dependency pattern from real hardware audits, occasionally. No schedule promised yet.
Cookie Notice
We use technically necessary cookies and — with your consent — additional cookies to analyse how this site is used and to understand which companies visit us. Accepting helps us improve the site and our offer. Details and providers:Privacy Policy You can change your choice there at any time.