Advisory
Platform Architecture Advisory

Before You Choose a Platform, Know What You're Choosing For.

Most platform decisions are made backwards. The RFP is written before requirements are mapped. Vendors are evaluated against features before functional gaps are defined. Exit costs are rarely calculated until renewal is already happening.

Platform Architecture Advisory produces the work that should precede any vendor evaluation.

THE MOST EXPENSIVE DECISION IN LOYALTY

The Five Ways Platform Decisions Go Wrong

Platform selection failures follow a predictable pattern. Tricycle Advisory has observed all five in client situations — often in combination.

Requirements Written From Features
The RFP is built from a list of features the current platform lacks, not from a model of what the program needs to do. The selected platform fills the feature gaps but creates new architectural constraints that emerge 12–18 months post-implementation.
Exit Costs Not Modeled
The switching cost from the incumbent vendor is calculated at contract termination, not during the evaluation. Data migration, integration rebuilds, workflow reconfiguration, and vendor transition management costs are underestimated by 2–3x in almost every case.
Scalability Priced at Growth
Most platform pricing models penalize success. Per-member pricing, per-transaction pricing, and tiered volume pricing all increase cost as the program succeeds. The platform that is affordable at current scale becomes expensive at target scale.
Multi-Audience Architecture Absent
Platforms selected for B2C consumer programs are asked to serve B2B partner programs and B2E employee programs on the same instance. Most cannot. The result: three separate platforms, three separate data models, three separate reporting environments, and no unified member view.
Governance Never Specified
AI capabilities are evaluated as a product feature — "does the platform have AI?" — rather than as an architecture question. Where does the AI model live, who owns the training data, and what are the data governance implications? In regulated industries, this distinction is the compliance question.
01
Phase One

Requirements Mapping

The requirements mapping phase produces a structured definition of what the platform must do — organized by functional domain, priority, and audience type.

Functional Requirements

What the platform must do across program administration, member management, journey orchestration, AI decisioning, integration, reporting, and compliance. Organized by must-have, should-have, and nice-to-have.

Non-Functional Requirements

Performance requirements, security requirements, data sovereignty requirements, compliance certifications, SLA obligations, and deployment model preferences. In regulated industries, these requirements eliminate most of the competitive platform field before functional evaluation begins.

Integration Requirements

Every system the platform must connect to — POS, CRM, CDP, ERP, email, mobile, data warehouse — with specific integration method, data flow direction, and latency requirement. The integration requirements map is typically the most revealing artifact produced in the advisory, because it reveals the full scope of what "implementation" actually means.

02
Phase Two

Current-State Architecture Assessment

Before evaluating alternatives, Tricycle Advisory maps the current platform's actual capability utilization.

Capability Utilization Assessment

What your current platform can do versus what your program uses. Most organizations use 40–60% of their current platform's capabilities. Before recommending a platform change, Tricycle Advisory identifies whether the remaining capability closes the identified gaps.

Exit Cost Calculation

A precise model of the total cost to exit the current platform: data migration, integration rebuilds, workflow reconfiguration, contract termination fees, parallel-run costs, and organizational transition costs.

Vendor Risk Assessment

An independent assessment of the current vendor's financial health, market position, and roadmap trajectory. Platform vendors are acquired, pivoted, and de-prioritized.

Phase Three Vendor Evaluation Matrix

The Seven Dimensions Tricycle Evaluates

The vendor evaluation matrix is calibrated to your specific requirements. We evaluate every platform against these seven critical dimensions.

Audience Architecture

Can B2C, B2B, and B2E programs run on a single instance with distinct mechanics, data models, and reporting?

What It Reveals

Whether the platform was designed for multi-audience programs or retrofitted for them.

Data Sovereignty

Where does client data reside? Does the client own it? Can the client exit without losing it?

What It Reveals

The real data governance posture — not the sales answer.

AI Architecture

Where does the AI model live? Who owns the training data? What are the data governance implications?

What It Reveals

Whether the AI is a shared model (compliance risk) or tenant-isolated (compliant).

Commercial Model

How does pricing scale with program growth? Is source code purchasable? What happens at renewal?

What It Reveals

Whether the platform penalizes success and creates leverage at renewal.

Integration Architecture

What integration methods are supported? What is the average time-to-integrate for a new system?

What It Reveals

Whether integration is a configuration decision or a development project.

Compliance Certifications

SOC 2, ISO 27001, HIPAA, GDPR, CCPA — which are attained, which are in-progress, which are claimed?

What It Reveals

The real compliance posture for regulated-industry deployments.

Implementation Model

Who implements? What does a standard timeline look like? What are the leading indicators of success?

What It Reveals

Whether the implementation model matches organizational capacity.

Phase Four Scenarios and Financial Model

Four Scenarios Modeled, With Financial Projections for Each

The advisory produces a financial model for each viable scenario, including a 5-year TCO comparison and capability gap closure analysis.

A

Optimize Current

Maximize utilization of existing capabilities before a platform change. Applicable when capability utilization assessment reveals significant unused functionality.

Favorable

Lowest short-term cost, fastest time to improvement, no migration risk.

Considerations

Does not close architectural gaps. Subject to vendor renewal leverage.

B

Migrate to I/O

Full migration to InsightsOutward with client-owned deployment. Applicable when architectural requirements cannot be met within the current platform.

Favorable

Multi-audience architecture, data sovereignty, I/O Sage™ AI, fixed-fee pricing.

Considerations

Migration complexity. Organizational change management. Implementation timeline 3–6 months.

C

Hybrid Architecture

Current platform retained for specific functions; I/O deployed for capabilities the incumbent cannot deliver. Applicable when exit cost is high.

Favorable

Preserves existing investment. Adds specific missing capabilities without full migration.

Considerations

Requires integration between platforms. Dual vendor management.

D

Custom Build

Build a proprietary platform internally. Typically applicable only when requirements are so specific that no existing platform addresses them.

Favorable

Maximum control. No vendor dependency.

Considerations

Highest cost. Longest timeline. Almost never the right answer for loyalty specifically.

WHAT THIS DELIVERS

Four Documents That Make the Platform Decision Defensible

01

Requirements Brief

A structured definition of what the platform must do, organized by functional domain, priority, and audience type. This document is the foundation for any vendor RFP.

02

Vendor Evaluation Matrix

A scored evaluation of each platform across the seven standard dimensions, calibrated to your specific requirements. Includes a confidence rating and a recommendation tier.

03

Architecture Recommendation

A specific recommendation with rationale: which scenario Tricycle Advisory recommends, why, and the conditions for alternative paths. A decision document, not a list of options.

04

5-Year Financial Model

TCO comparison across all modeled scenarios, including migration costs, integration costs, and program economics projection. The document your CEO needs to approve.

WHO CONDUCTS THE ADVISORY

Platform Architecture Advisory is conducted by the Tricycle team that has built, configured, and operated InsightsOutward at enterprise scale. The assessment is honest about where InsightsOutward is the right answer and where it is not. The advisory is not an I/O sales process — it is an independent assessment that may lead to an I/O recommendation, a competitor recommendation, or a hybrid recommendation.

The Platform Decision Deserves a Practitioner Assessment

The Platform Architecture Advisory begins with a 60-minute discovery conversation about your current platform, your program requirements, and your evaluation timeline. No deck. No vendor presentation. A practitioner conversation about what you need the platform to do.

"Two of the world's largest global systems integrators independently assessed InsightsOutward and placed it in their recommended mix of enterprise loyalty technology vendors. The platform architecture evaluation that precedes a recommendation like that is the same assessment Tricycle Advisory produces for clients before they make a platform decision."