About +
Our Story Our Values Career History
Services +
Overview CQCS Framework Executive Release Assurance Test Automation Advisory Performance Engineering Delivery Assurance Security Testing (OWASP) QA Maturity Assessment
ERA +
What It Is The Five Dimensions What You Receive The Verdict Framework Request an Assessment
Case Studies +
Scottish Government Deutsche Bank EY / CadentGas Commerzbank
Careers +
Why CalyTeQ Current Roles Associate Programme Nigeria Market
Book a Call
Our Services

Six engagement models.
One purpose.

Each service addresses a distinct dimension of release risk. All six apply the same underlying methodology — the CQCS™ G.R.A.D.E. Model — so every engagement produces defensible, audit-ready output, regardless of scope.

The Methodology

Powered by the CalyTeQ
Quality Confidence System.

CQCS™ is the proprietary framework underneath every CalyTeQ engagement. Five Confidence Pillars. A defined assessment instrument. A single defensible grade, from AAA to CCC, that maps directly to a release decision a Board can act on.

G
Governance
25%
R
Resilience
25%
A
Automation
15%
D
Delivery
20%
E
Exposure
15%
Explore the framework →
Flagship Service

Executive
Release
Assurance.

Clarity · Confidence · Control

An independent, senior-led assessment of a specific release. Every Confidence Pillar examined against evidence. A single defensible grade. A clear Go, Go with Conditions, or No-Go recommendation — and an evidence pack that will withstand audit and regulatory scrutiny.

What you receive
  • The CQCS™ Confidence Grade (AAA to CCC) for the release in scope
  • Written Executive Release Assurance report — structured for Board and regulatory review
  • Pillar-by-pillar findings with evidence anchors and scoring rationale
  • Prioritised recommendations with ownership and time horizons
  • Evidence pack suitable for internal audit and regulatory review on request
  • 30-minute executive presentation to your senior leadership team
Duration 5 to 10 working days. Scope agreed before day one.
Engagement Defined scope. Defined deliverables. No open-ended retainer required to start.
Coverage All five G.R.A.D.E. pillars at full depth.
Led by Anthony Adeloye, Principal Consultant. No junior delivery.
Learn more about ERA Book a scoping call
FCA SS1/21 PRA SS1/21 DORA BCBS 239 SMCR
Executive release decision meeting
Confidence Grade output
AAA
AA
A
BBB
BB
B
CCC

The grade maps directly to a release decision. Investment Grade (AAA, AA, A): Go. Conditional (BBB, BB): Go with named conditions. High Risk / Critical (B, CCC): No-Go.

Who requests ERA
CTOs and CIOs carrying personal sign-off accountability under SMCR or equivalent regimes
Programme Directors managing major change programmes with regulatory or Board visibility
Heads of Quality who need an independent view alongside internal assessment
Risk and Audit functions requiring a structured technology quality assessment for a specific release
Test automation code and pipeline
Common problems
Test runs green, production breaks
High flakiness — failures routinely re-run
Coverage metrics that don't map to risk
Automation creating technical debt faster than value
Pipeline too slow to support release cadence
After advisory
Automation signal you can release on
Flakiness tracked, managed, trending down
Coverage focused on what matters
Suite that's an asset, not a liability
Pipeline that accelerates release, not delays it
CQCS Pillar Alignment
Automation Integrity (primary)
CQCS Pillar A — coverage validity, flakiness index, false confidence detection, pipeline effectiveness. Delivery Risk and Exposure examined as they interact with automation quality.
Specialised Service

Test Automation
Advisory.

Accelerate · Without Compromising

Test automation that runs is not the same as automation that tells the truth. This service assesses your current automation capability against the CQCS™ Automation Integrity pillar, identifies where the signal can't be trusted, and builds a roadmap to close the gap.

What you receive
  • Current-state assessment: coverage validity, flakiness, pipeline effectiveness
  • CQCS™ Automation Integrity pillar score with evidence anchors
  • Identification of false confidence sources in your current suite
  • Prioritised automation roadmap with effort and impact estimates
  • Framework recommendations: structure, tooling, maintenance discipline
  • Metrics dashboard design so you can monitor progress independently
Duration 2 to 4 weeks. Phased delivery.
Engagement Defined scope. Outcomes agreed before work begins.
Coverage Automation Integrity primary · Delivery Risk, Exposure secondary
Discuss your automation Try the live demonstrator
Specialised Service

Performance &
Resilience
Engineering.

Load · Stress · Scalability · Recovery

Software passes tests under convenient conditions. Software fails in production under real ones. This service closes the gap between stated resilience and validated resilience — with particular relevance to FCA SS1/21 impact tolerance obligations and DORA Article 11.

What you receive
  • Production-representative load test design and execution
  • Failure mode analysis: what breaks, how, and what the system does next
  • Recovery pathway validation — RTO proven, not assumed
  • Dependency resilience assessment: third-party and internal
  • CQCS™ Resilience Assurance pillar score with full evidence pack
  • Findings report aligned to FCA SS1/21 and DORA Article 11 obligations
Duration 2 to 6 weeks, scoped to system criticality.
Engagement Defined scope. Outcomes agreed before work begins.
Coverage Resilience Assurance primary · Exposure, Delivery Risk secondary
Discuss your system See the framework
FCA SS1/21 PRA SS1/21 DORA Art. 11 BCBS Sound Practices
Performance data and analytics dashboard
What we test
1
Production-representative load
Real peak patterns, real concurrency, real data volumes. Not the tidy load that lives in a test script.
2
Failure modes, systematically
Known failure modes tested. Unknown failure modes hunted. Dependencies probed for single points of failure.
3
Recovery, not just procedure
Recovery time objectives validated under realistic conditions. If you haven't proved the number, you don't have the number.
4
Impact tolerance validation
For FCA/PRA-regulated firms: impact tolerances demonstrated through scenario testing, not declared through policy.
Senior quality engineering practitioner on retainer
How the retainer works
1
Baseline assessment
Month one: full CQCS™ assessment establishes your current Confidence Grade across all five pillars and identifies priority gaps.
2
Ongoing oversight
Regular senior practitioner involvement: release gate reviews, evidence validation, stakeholder briefings, and advisory on quality decisions.
3
Quarterly Confidence Grade refresh
A full CQCS™ re-assessment each quarter tracks maturity movement and produces an updated grade for Board and audit reporting.
4
Audit-ready evidence
Continuous evidence trail accumulation. Every quarterly output is audit-ready by construction, not remediation.
CQCS Coverage
All five G.R.A.D.E. pillars, ongoing. Weights adjusted per programme risk profile.
Ongoing Retainer

Delivery
Assurance.

Sustained Senior Oversight · Continuous Confidence

CQCS™ applied continuously, not per-release. A senior CalyTeQ practitioner embedded part-time in your programme — providing ongoing quality oversight, release gate support, and a quarterly Confidence Grade for Board and regulatory reporting.

The Delivery Assurance retainer is the right model when you need quality engineering expertise that compounds over time, not a point-in-time snapshot.

What you receive
  • Named senior practitioner on retainer — not rotated
  • Quarterly CQCS™ Confidence Grade with full evidence pack
  • Release gate support across all significant releases in scope
  • Monthly quality briefing for senior leadership
  • Standing access for ad-hoc quality and risk questions
  • Maturity progression tracking against the CQCS™ Maturity Ladder
Structure Monthly retainer. Minimum 6-month initial term.
Engagement Scoped to your programme. Contact for a conversation.
Coverage All five pillars, continuous
Enquire about a retainer Book a scoping call
Specialised Service

Security
Testing
(OWASP).

Identify · Assess · Remediate

BFSI applications are prime targets. In regulated environments, security is not a development concern — it is a regulatory one. PCI-DSS, FCA, PRA, ISO 27001 all require demonstrable evidence that your application layer has been systematically tested against recognised security standards. This service provides that evidence.

What you receive
  • OWASP Top 10 Assessment Report — systematic vulnerability analysis with evidence and severity ratings
  • API Security Review — authentication, authorisation, injection, and sensitive data exposure risks
  • Security Test Coverage Map — gaps across the SDLC with prioritised closure plan
  • Vulnerability Remediation Matrix — critical findings ranked by exploitability and business impact
  • Regulatory Evidence Pack — documentation suitable for PCI-DSS, FCA, and ISO 27001 requirements
  • CI/CD Security Integration Plan — recommendations for shifting security checks left
Duration 2 to 3 weeks. Scoped to application complexity.
Engagement Defined scope. Outcomes agreed before work begins.
Coverage Exposure primary · Governance Discipline secondary
Discuss your security posture See the framework
PCI-DSS FCA PRA ISO 27001 DORA
Application security testing
OWASP Top 10 — Primary Focus Areas
1
Injection & Authentication
SQL, NoSQL, and command injection. Broken authentication and session management vulnerabilities most likely to be exploited in BFSI applications.
2
API Security
Authentication, authorisation, rate limiting, and data exposure across your API surface — the attack vector most commonly missed by standard test cycles.
3
Sensitive Data Exposure
Encryption in transit and at rest, PII handling, and data leakage risks with direct implications for FCA, GDPR, and PCI-DSS compliance.
4
Access Control & Misconfiguration
Broken access control, security misconfiguration, and insecure design patterns — the highest-frequency vulnerabilities in enterprise BFSI environments.
QA maturity assessment and roadmap
CQCS™ Maturity Scorecard
G
Governance
R
Resilience
A
Automation
D
Delivery
E
Exposure
Roadmap Output
A prioritised 30/60/90-day improvement plan with effort ratings, dependencies, and expected quality outcomes — not a list of observations.
Specialised Service

QA Maturity
Assessment.

Know Where You Stand · Know What to Fix

Most quality engineering problems are invisible until they become expensive. The test suite is running. Sprints are completing. The dashboard shows green. But production incidents still slip through. The QA Maturity Assessment is the diagnostic that makes the invisible visible — assessed by an independent senior practitioner, not the team closest to the work.

What you receive
  • QA Maturity Scorecard — RAG-rated across all five G.R.A.D.E. pillars against BFSI industry benchmarks
  • Critical User Journey Map — highest-risk regression paths ranked by business impact and coverage gap
  • Automation Gap Analysis — coverage gaps, false confidence risks, and framework health assessment
  • Performance Risk Summary — NFR gaps, peak load validation status, resilience testing coverage
  • 30/60/90-Day Roadmap — prioritised actions with effort ratings and expected quality outcomes
  • Leadership Presentation — findings delivered directly to your senior technology stakeholders
  • 30-day post-delivery support — questions answered at no additional charge
Duration 2 weeks. Structured delivery. No open-ended scope.
Engagement Fixed scope. Defined deliverables. Clear start and end.
Coverage All five G.R.A.D.E. pillars — full depth assessment
Led by Anthony Adeloye, Principal Consultant. No junior delivery.
Book your assessment Book a scoping call
How We Work

A structured path from
risk to confidence.

Most clients start with a single ERA or advisory engagement and move to retained oversight as the value of continuous CQCS coverage becomes clear.

I
Assessment
Defined Scope · Clear Deliverables
A defined-scope CQCS™ assessment establishes your current quality posture, identifies priority gaps, and produces a Confidence Grade. Completed in 1 to 4 weeks depending on scope. Most clients start here.
II
Advisory
Outcome-Defined · Not Time-and-Materials
Senior-led advisory against the priority gaps identified in the assessment — automation improvement, performance engineering, or governance redesign. Outcomes defined upfront, not hours.
III
Ongoing Assurance
Monthly Retainer · Senior-Led Throughout
Sustained quality engineering partnership. Continuous senior expertise as your environment evolves — with quarterly Confidence Grade refresh for Board and regulatory reporting.

The question every release
needs to answer.

Are we ready? If you can't answer that with evidence, I'd welcome the conversation.

Book a 30-minute call Try the live demonstrator