← Back to all results
Case study · GoTriangle, North Carolina

Before you replace it, find out what it can still do.

GoTriangle moves people across the Research Triangle. Its enterprise system was not keeping pace. Rather than start with a procurement, the authority engaged Avèro to establish whether the platform it already owns could be optimized into what it needs, and what replacement would actually cost if not.

The brief

Most agencies answer the replace-or-optimize question by going to market. That is an expensive way to run a diagnostic.

GoTriangle is the regional public transportation authority serving Raleigh, Durham, Chapel Hill, and the surrounding Research Triangle. Like most transit agencies, it carries a demanding mix of obligations: federal grant reporting, capital program accounting, procurement compliance, and the daily finance and workforce operations that keep buses moving.

The enterprise platform supporting that work was not delivering what the agency needed. The instinct in that situation is to write an RFP. It is also the most expensive way to find out whether replacement was necessary, because a procurement commits time, staff attention, and political capital before anyone has established what the current system can actually be made to do.

GoTriangle engaged Avèro in December 2025 to answer the question properly first. The work began with a needs assessment across the functions that touch the platform, then a requirements traceability matrix defining what the agency genuinely requires rather than what it currently has.

Those requirements were then tested against both futures. Could the existing platform, tuned and reconfigured with its gaps addressed, meet them? Or does the gap between requirement and capability justify going to market? The strategic optimization plan sets out both paths with a roadmap and a cost picture for each, so the decision rests on evidence.

Going to market is a decision, not a diagnostic. Make the decision after you know the answer, not to find it.
Abhijit Verekar · Founder & CEO · Avèro Advisors
What the work produced

Answer the replace-or-optimize question with evidence.

A needs assessment and requirements traceability matrix built the factual basis. The strategic optimization plan priced both futures so the Board could choose between them rather than between opinions.

Assessment

Needs assessment

Structured review across the finance, procurement, capital, and workforce functions that depend on the platform, documenting what the agency actually needs the system to do.

Assessment

Current-state capability review

An honest read on what the existing environment delivers today and where the real gaps sit, separating configuration problems from genuine platform limitations.

Requirements

Requirements traceability matrix

Requirements written so each can be tested against both an optimized current state and a prospective replacement, and later scored against vendor responses if the agency goes to market.

Analysis

Optimization pathway

What tuning, reconfiguring, and extending the current platform would deliver against the requirements, at what cost, and on what timeline.

Analysis

Replacement pathway

What a full replacement would require in budget, duration, and organizational effort, sized realistically rather than optimistically.

Strategy

Strategic optimization plan & roadmap

Both paths presented with a costed roadmap, so leadership and the Board can weigh them against each other on the same basis.

How the work is structured

Two futures, priced the same way.

Optimize what exists

Keep the platform the agency has already paid for, close the gaps through configuration and targeted extension, and avoid a multi-year replacement program.

Go to market

If the requirements genuinely exceed what the platform can deliver, the assessment and traceability matrix become the foundation of a procurement that is ready to run.

Either way

The work is not wasted

The needs assessment and requirements matrix hold their value under both outcomes, which is what makes an evidence-first sequence cheaper than a procurement-first one.

Why it matters

An advisor with no implementation revenue can afford to recommend doing less.

A firm that sells implementation services has an interest in the replacement answer. A firm that resells software has an interest in a particular replacement answer. Avèro sells neither, so recommending that GoTriangle optimize what it already owns costs the firm nothing. That is the only structure under which the optimize option gets a fair hearing.

Both paths, one fee No resale · No implementation stake · Priced the same whichever answer the evidence supports

Schedule a briefing

Running something similar? Let's talk.

Thirty minutes. No pitch. If Avèro isn't the right fit, we'll tell you who is.