Why I Started The Build Paradox
I've spent 25 years building things.
That probably sounds obvious for someone with "technology" in their job title, but it's worth saying because not everyone in technology actually builds anymore. Plenty of people manage. Advise. Review. Sit in meetings about what should be built. The further you go in your career, the easier it is to drift away from the work itself.
I never wanted that. As a CTO, I stayed close to the architecture. As an architect, I stayed close to the code. I've always needed to understand how things actually work, not just how they're supposed to work on a slide deck.
That's probably why I've started a consultancy. It lets me take on interesting problems while I figure out what the right next step looks like.
The honest answer
The work I enjoy most is the variety: different problems, different industries, different stages of the company. One engagement might be helping a startup figure out its architecture before they paint themselves into a corner. Another might be giving an investor an honest assessment of what they're actually buying. Another might be getting a stuck platform moving again after months of going nowhere.
I like building. I like problem-solving. I like being useful in ways that aren't the same thing every day.
The Build Paradox lets me do that.
Why "The Build Paradox"?
The name comes from something I've watched happen repeatedly over 25 years: the pressure to build fast often prevents companies from building well. They accumulate quick fixes and architectural compromises that eventually become permanent reality. The thing that was supposed to be temporary becomes the foundation on which everything else sits.
This isn't just a technology problem. My house builder saved £300 by not fitting an internal door. Eighteen months later, that missing door cost me £2,400 and a Sunday morning sawing through my wall. Construction, software, business decisions, the pattern is the same: shortcuts compound.
What I actually do
I work with companies in a few different ways, depending on what they need:
Fractional CTO or Architecture Leadership, for companies that need senior technical direction but aren't ready for a full-time executive hire. I work alongside founders, boards, and existing teams to set strategy, make architectural decisions, and ensure technology investments deliver. This usually suits startups, scale-ups, or companies in transition.
Technical Due Diligence, for investors, acquirers, or companies evaluating a major technology purchase. I provide an honest, independent view of what's actually there, the architecture, the team capability, and the hidden risks. I've worked in industries where getting this wrong is expensive.
Platform Assessment, for companies whose technology is struggling to scale, taking too long to change, or approaching a difficult decision about whether to fix or rebuild. Sometimes the answer is a new system. Often it isn't. I help figure out which.
POC Development: Sometimes you need to test an idea before committing to a complete build. I help develop proof-of-concept implementations that validate assumptions, support internal business cases, or demonstrate viability to investors. This is hands-on work, and I enjoy it.
The hands-on bit
I should say this directly: I'm not a consultant who stopped writing code years ago. I've maintained technical depth throughout my career. I can discuss architecture with a board and understand what's happening in the codebase, the same week.
That matters because companies sometimes bring in senior advisors who can't actually evaluate the work their teams are doing. I can. When I look at architecture, I don't rely on summaries; I understand the trade-offs at a practical level.
Background
The short version: I've been in technology since the late 1990s. I've founded companies, raised investment, and navigated businesses through difficult periods. I've worked across insurance, emergency services, laboratory robotics, GPS tracking, and e-commerce.
Most recently, I was CTO at RightIndem, where I was hands-on with clients – sitting in workshops, understanding their claims operations, and helping design FNOL journeys that actually fit how they worked. I designed the technical transformation roadmap for the platform and led the business case that secured Innovate UK funding for generative AI research.
Before that, I was architecting a claims platform at Instanda and served as CTO at ATLAS Live Tracking, where I developed the MVP and first production version of their GPS and BLE timing platform.
I've built systems that are still running a decade later. I've also inherited systems that should have been retired years ago. Both taught me something.
If any of this is relevant
If you've got something stuck, a decision you're uncertain about, or you want a technical perspective before committing to something significant – I'm happy to have a conversation. No pitch, no pressure. Just a chat about whether I can help.
DM me on LinkedIn, email chris@buildparadox.com.
I'm UK-based but work remotely. Engagement models are flexible – we can figure out what makes sense.
Chris Brown is the founder of The Build Paradox. He writes about technical debt, architecture decisions, and building technology that lasts.
