AI tools make your developers write code 55% faster. But they increase PR sizes by 20%, overwhelm senior reviewers, and introduce 20–30% more vulnerabilities. I help European enterprises capture the speed — without the hidden organisational costs.
AI coding tools solve the individual speed problem and create an organisational one. Here's what that looks like in practice.
AI tools increase average PR sizes by 20%. Those larger, faster-arriving PRs land in the queue of your most senior — and most bottlenecked — engineers. Your lead time isn't improving because the bottleneck moved from writing to reviewing, and your DORA metrics are masking it.
Research shows AI-assisted developers are 20–30% more likely to introduce security vulnerabilities. LLMs confidently generate outdated patterns, insecure defaults, and hallucinated dependencies. Most CI pipelines aren't configured to catch AI-specific failure modes — and attackers already know it.
Major EU AI Act obligations are now in effect, including Article 4 AI Literacy mandates. For DACH enterprises, Works Council (Betriebsrat) approval requirements add another layer — and § 87 BetrVG prohibits using AI tools for performance monitoring without co-determination. Most engineering teams have zero documented compliance posture.
Redesign your software delivery lifecycle around AI tools — DORA/SPACE baseline measurement, Review Economics fixes, and Automated Quality Gates calibrated to catch the vulnerabilities AI specifically introduces.
Article 4 AI Literacy programmes, Works Council-ready deployment frameworks for DACH enterprises, and a documented compliance posture before your audit window.
Invert your SDLC so formal specifications are the source of truth — not code. AI agents generate from specs, eliminating the ambiguity tax that forces LLMs to guess intent and produce rework. Feature delivery drops from days to hours.
27% of AI startup cloud budgets are wasted on idle or oversized LLM infrastructure. I cut inference spend 40–70% via AWS Inferentia2 (Inf2) migration and per-user token tracking — so you know exactly where AI ROI is real.
My most requested engagement for 2026. A 4-week fixed-scope audit of how AI tools are actually affecting your delivery performance — not how you think they are. I establish a DORA/SPACE baseline, quantify the hidden Review Economics cost, and implement Automated Quality Gates before I leave.
Free 30-min scoping call first.
No commitment, no pressure.
Article 4 AI Literacy programme for engineering teams. For DACH enterprises: a Works Council-ready (Betriebsrat) deployment framework ensuring AI tools satisfy § 87 BetrVG — no performance monitoring, full co-determination.
RollingImplement a workflow where machine-readable specifications are the source of truth. AI agents generate code from formal specs — eliminating rework from ambiguity. Typical feature delivery: from days to hours.
6–8 WeeksCut LLM inference costs 40–70% via AWS Inferentia2 (Inf2) migration. Predictive token tracking with AWS Lambda attributes spend to users, teams, or features — so AI ROI is measurable, not assumed.
3–4 Weeks1–3 days per month of embedded advisory. AI tooling strategy, vendor evaluation, SDLC architecture decisions, board-level AI ROI reporting, and hands-on implementation when the work demands it.
OngoingReal numbers from real projects. Clients anonymised at their request.
Led enterprise-wide GitHub Copilot and AI coding assistant rollout — from pilot design through full-org adoption. Included governance frameworks, AI Literacy training, Review Economics tooling, and measurable DORA metric improvement across all four key indicators.
Identified and eliminated cloud waste through rightsizing, Reserved Instance optimisation, and zombie resource cleanup. Delivered spend dashboards and cost attribution tooling — including LLM inference cost tracking — so the savings persisted after handover.
Led the full engineering workforce migration to GitHub Enterprise with standardised CI/CD, branch protection, and SAST tooling — building the secure foundation required for safe AI-assisted development at scale without Review Economics collapse.
"Matt didn't just roll out GitHub Copilot — he redesigned how our engineering organisation reviews and ships AI-generated code. Adoption went up, but so did our DORA scores. That combination is genuinely rare."
"We thought our AI investment was paying off until Matt showed us the Review Economics numbers. Senior engineers were spending 40% more time in code review. He fixed the pipeline in two weeks and the change was immediately visible in our lead time metrics."
"The EU AI Act compliance work was exactly what we needed before our Works Council review. Matt understood the Betriebsrat requirements cold and built a deployment framework our legal and engineering teams could both sign off on."
I'm Matt Drankowski — an independent Engineering Consultant based in Kraków, Poland. My focus is helping European enterprises, particularly in the DACH and Nordic regions, build the organisational infrastructure to actually benefit from AI coding tools — not just pay for the licences.
My most recent enterprise role was leading the GitHub Copilot and AI Assistant rollout across a Fortune 100 organisation. That work taught me that the technical implementation is the easy part. The hard part is fixing Review Economics, establishing governance, running AI Literacy programmes, and measuring real lead time impact rather than individual typing speed.
I carry 13+ years of AWS and platform engineering experience into every engagement — from LLM inference cost optimisation on AWS Inferentia2 to EU AI Act Article 4 compliance and Works Council deployment frameworks for DACH enterprise clients.
Both tools are free. Most teams find the numbers more surprising than expected.
Input your team size, current DORA metrics, AI tool spend, and average PR size — and see whether your productivity gains are real or masked by Review Economics overhead. Includes the Code Volume Inflation model showing where your 55% typing speed gain is actually going.
Get the CalculatorA 40-point checklist covering Article 4 AI Literacy obligations, high-risk system classification, technical documentation requirements, and Works Council readiness for DACH enterprises. Updated for current EU AI Act timelines — use it to know exactly where your gaps are before an auditor does.
Get the ChecklistWhen AI tools increase individual coding speed, they typically increase PR sizes by 15–20%. Those larger, faster-arriving PRs land in the review queue of your most senior — and most expensive — engineers. Your developers are faster; your review pipeline isn't. The result is flat or worsening organisational lead time despite real improvements in individual output. Review Economics is the discipline of measuring and resolving that bottleneck — it's the difference between AI making your organisation faster vs. making individuals faster while the organisation stalls.
Yes — DACH (Germany, Austria, Switzerland) and Nordic (Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Finland) are my primary markets. I understand both the regulatory landscape (EU AI Act, GDPR, Works Council requirements under § 87 BetrVG) and the engineering culture. Based in Kraków, Poland (CET/CEST), I cover EU business hours naturally. I also work with UK and US enterprises — particularly those with European subsidiaries navigating EU AI Act compliance obligations for their engineering teams.
Article 4 requires organisations deploying AI systems to ensure staff have sufficient AI literacy to understand the capabilities, limitations, and risks of the tools they use — including AI coding assistants. This is not just a training checkbox. It requires documented competency assessment, a governance framework, and for DACH enterprises, a Works Council-approved deployment plan ensuring AI tools aren't used for performance monitoring, as required by German labour law (§ 87 BetrVG). Organisations without this documentation are exposed in any future audit or Works Council dispute.
SDD uses machine-readable specifications — not prose Jira tickets — as the authoritative source of truth. A formal spec defines behaviour, contracts, and acceptance criteria in a structured format that AI agents can consume directly. Instead of an LLM guessing intent from a description, it generates code from a deterministic spec — dramatically reducing rework and eliminating hallucinated logic. Typical outcome: feature implementation time drops from days to hours. I build the full toolchain: spec format, agent pipeline, output validation, and CI integration to verify spec conformance automatically.
I'm accepting 1 new engagement for Q2 2026. I cap active engagements deliberately to protect the quality of every client's work — so book a discovery call this week if your timeline is urgent. The call typically happens within 2–3 business days. We spend 30 minutes on your current AI tooling stack, delivery metrics, and regulatory exposure. If there's a clear fit, I scope a fixed engagement within 48 hours. No lengthy proposals, no retainer lock-in upfront.
Book a free 30-minute discovery call. We'll look at your AI tooling, your delivery metrics, and where the real ROI gap is. No pitch, no commitment required.
Not ready yet? Download the free ROI tools or email [email protected]