Home About Case Studies Hire Me Contact
Currently available for select engagements

Hire Fractional CTO for Energy Companies
Senior, direct, no layers

Fractional CTO for energy companies: cleaner meter-to-cash, fewer billing exceptions, and reporting that stands up to scrutiny.

15+
Years Experience
100+
Projects Delivered
6
Countries Served
$25M+
Revenue Enabled
Energy Companies — Fractional CTO & Technology Leadership

A senior fractional cto for energy companies

A energy companies firm that is growing usually reaches a point where technology decisions stop being occasional purchases and start being bets: which systems to keep, what to build, what to buy, who to hire, and what to stop paying for. Those decisions are too important to leave to vendors, and too infrequent to justify a full-time technology chief.

A fractional CTO fills that gap part-time: a senior technology leader working with the firm on a regular cadence, owning the technology roadmap, the vendor decisions, the hiring calls and the architecture judgement, without joining the payroll full-time. The firm gets experienced leadership for the decisions that matter, and no leader for the days when there is nothing to decide.

The engagement is advisory and accountable in equal measure. Advice that nobody implements is theatre, so the role includes following decisions through: checking the build, challenging the vendor, and reporting plainly when a plan is off track, including when the honest advice is to spend less.

If technology decisions need a steady hand, start with a leadership conversation and we will start with an inventory of what exists and what it costs.

What you get

What this engagement covers for energy companies

  • Metering and billing decisions first — Customer information, interval metering and billing sit at the centre of an energy firm's technology bill, so the opening work ranks those systems before anything customer-facing is bought. SAP IS-U, Oracle Utilities Customer Cloud Service or Salesforce Energy and Utilities Cloud are judged on how cleanly they handle tariffs, estimated reads, rebills and payment plans, and on what it costs to change tariff logic later without a vendor project.
  • Operational data kept apart from office systems — The AVEVA PI System and similar operational historians hold time-series readings that office tools were never built to carry. This part of the engagement draws a firm line between operational networks and business networks, names who may move data across that line, and refuses dashboards that quietly copy raw operational feeds into a general reporting tool.
  • Grid and asset tooling on evidence, not vendor maps — Siemens EnergyIP and Schneider Electric EcoStruxure proposals are tested against the firm's actual asset register, outage history and field workflows. A tool that models the network well but cannot accept the field crew's as-found condition reports will sit unused, so acceptance is tied to a crew completing a real job through it.
  • Meter fleets and device lifecycles planned as a programme — Itron and Landis+Gyr meter estates fail in batches, not one by one, and a replacement programme decided meter by meter becomes a rolling emergency. The roadmap groups meters by age, firmware and communications path, sequences replacements around reading cycles, and budgets for the head-end and integration work that a meter price alone hides.
  • Vendor contracts read for exit and data return — Every major contract is reviewed for how usage, meter and customer data comes back if the relationship ends, in what format, and over what period. A supplier that charges per meter per month but will only return data in its own export format is priced with that exit cost included, not as a headline rate.
  • A hiring plan tied to the control room, not headcount fashion — Roles are defined from the work that actually stalls: metering data quality, integration upkeep, and field-system support. The engagement separates a permanent hire who should own the customer information system from contractor work on a single migration, so the firm does not hire permanently for a temporary peak.
Systems this industry runs

Built around the tools energy companies already use

The stack in an energy company usually arrives in layers that were bought by different teams: customer information and billing in one place, smart metering and head-end systems in another, operational historians and grid tools in a third, and finance and customer contact tools somewhere else again. The CTO's first document is a map of those layers, showing which system owns the customer, which owns the meter reading, which owns the asset, and where the same fact is stored twice with different values. That map, not a vendor's architecture diagram, is what later decisions are checked against.

Judgement here is mostly about sequencing. A billing replacement attempted while meter data quality is poor will simply bill the errors faster, and a customer portal launched on top of an unreconciled meter estate will generate contact volume the firm cannot staff. So early work is unglamorous: reading-quality reports, exception queues with named owners, and a freeze on new customer-facing features until the underlying reads can be trusted. Later work — self-service, flexible tariffs, outage communication — only starts once those foundations hold.

How it works

From kickoff to delivery for energy companies

  1. Trace one customer journey end to end

    Pick a single household from meter read to bill to payment, and follow its data through every system it touches. The breaks found on that walk — a read that never arrives, a tariff applied by hand, a payment matched to the wrong account — become the first ranked list, because they are observed, not assumed.

  2. Rank fixes by billing and safety consequence

    Each break is scored on what it does to revenue accuracy, to regulatory reporting, and to field safety, and the ranking is agreed with operations and finance together. Anything that touches billing accuracy or operational data integrity goes before convenience features, even when the convenience feature has a louder sponsor.

  3. Put one system owner in writing per layer

    For customer data, metering data, operational data and asset data, a named internal owner is recorded, with what they may change and what needs CTO sign-off. Without that, every integration decision drifts back to whoever shouts last, and the same reconciliation argument repeats at every meeting.

  4. Review each quarter against reads, rebills and exceptions

    Progress is checked on meter-read success, rebill volumes, exception backlogs and vendor delivery, not on milestones claimed in a status deck. If rebills are not falling, the roadmap is changed, even if that means pausing a portal or app project that looked good in a demo.

Why Omer

Why hire Omer

  • Billing accuracy before new features: New customer tools are held back until reads and tariffs can be trusted, because a pretty portal on inaccurate bills creates complaints, not loyalty.
  • Operational networks treated as safety systems: Data crossing from operational to office networks is handled with explicit controls, not casual exports, because a metering or grid feed is not ordinary office data.
  • Contracts priced with the exit included: A vendor is judged on total cost over the contract plus the cost of leaving it, including data return in a usable format.
  • Field crews as acceptance testers: A system is accepted when a crew can run a real job through it under field conditions, not when a vendor demonstrates it in a meeting room.
  • One owner per data layer, in writing: Customer, meter, operational and asset data each get a named owner, so disputes about which number is right have an answer instead of another meeting.
FAQ

Questions, answered

How is this different from hiring a developer or consultant?
A developer builds a defined piece of software. This engagement owns the judgement around it for an energy firm: which billing, metering and grid systems to keep, what order to replace them in, how operational and office data stay separated, and whether a vendor proposal survives contact with the firm's actual meter estate and tariff rules.
How much time does the firm get?
A fixed rhythm agreed at the start, with time weighted toward the decisions that carry billing or operational risk, and availability between sessions when a meter-data or billing issue cannot wait for the next meeting. The rhythm follows the firm's change calendar — reading cycles, tariff changes, regulatory deadlines — rather than a generic template.
Do you manage our developers directly?
Usually through direction and oversight rather than line management: setting priorities for developers and vendors, reviewing their work against the roadmap, and reporting to firm leadership. Direct management is arranged only where the firm has no technical manager of its own to carry day-to-day direction.
What if we already have an IT provider?
The role works alongside an incumbent provider, independently reviewing its proposals and delivery. An existing provider is treated as a supplier to be managed against scope and cost, and the CTO gives the firm the technical judgement to challenge a proposal without having to become technical itself.
What do you need from us to start?
Access to current systems and contracts, an honest account of where billing, metering or field data breaks down, and a leadership sponsor who can make decisions across operations and finance. The opening trace of a customer journey from read to bill needs candour about manual workarounds, not the version of the process in the procedure manual.
Currently available for select engagements

Ready to get started?

The best way to explore working together is a quick conversation. Reach out through your preferred channel and let us discuss your project.