Continuous improvements and monitoring

It depends on scope - the operational model for a single-site marketing team looks very different from a multi-site enterprise portfolio, and the biggest cost driver is usually how much day-to-day ownership you want us to hold versus how much your own team retains. Rather than publish a number that would only be accurate for one kind of engagement, we scope cost against the same factors we use to scope the work itself: platform footprint, the update/security cadence required, and how much of day-to-day operations you're looking to hand off.

Yes - plenty of engagements start exactly that way. Something's broken or behaving oddly, you call, we diagnose it and fix it, and that can be the entire engagement - no retainer or ongoing commitment required first. We bring the same Sitefinity-specific context to a single fix request as we do to an ongoing engagement, so it's not a lesser or “no support” tier - it's just scoped to the issue in front of you. Some one-off fixes turn into a longer relationship once the fit is clear, but that's not a requirement; solving the immediate problem is a complete outcome on its own.

We do both, and neither is the “wrong” choice - it depends on what you actually need right now. Break-fix is reactive by design: something's not working, you call, we diagnose and fix it, and that's the whole engagement, no ongoing commitment required. A managed retainer adds a proactive layer on top - updates, security patching, and performance monitoring on a standing rhythm, so more issues get caught as drift before they turn into a call in the first place. If you only need something fixed today, break-fix is a completely reasonable way to work with us; a retainer just also covers the maintenance that prevents the next issue.

A Sitefinity managed services engagement typically combines three threads we treat as connected rather than as separate line items: platform currency (updates and security patching handled on a proactive rhythm instead of deferred until forced), performance operations (monitoring, capacity planning, and incident response as load changes), and day-to-day platform administration for teams that want operational ownership handled for them. Exactly which of these are in scope, and at what level, is something we scope per engagement rather than sell as a fixed package, since a single-site marketing team and a multi-site enterprise portfolio need very different contracts.

Yes - taking over operations can mean anything from light oversight to full day-to-day ownership: routine content and platform administration, monitoring, and holding the operational knowledge that would otherwise live only with whoever's currently running the site. We start with a short assessment of your current operational patterns and, if we didn't build the site ourselves, the implementation too - undocumented customizations, taxonomy decisions, widget configurations nobody wrote down - before proposing a specific model rather than assuming full handoff is what's needed.

Yes - and that's not limited to sites we built ourselves. We provide ongoing Sitefinity support and maintenance both as a natural extension of our own implementation projects and as a standalone engagement for sites originally built by other vendors or agencies. Most consultancies disappear after go-live regardless of who built the site — we've built our operational-excellence practice specifically around being the team that stays, or the team that steps in later once the original team already has. Our team has managed day-to-day operations for 100+ Sitefinity implementations directly, and getting up to speed on someone else's build - undocumented customizations, taxonomy decisions, widget configurations nobody wrote down - is a normal part of that work, not an obstacle.

Yes - we set up audience segments in Sitefinity Insight based on behavioral, firmographic, or engagement signals, then connect those segments to targeting rules across your Sitefinity content. This typically starts with defining a small number of meaningful segments tied to real business decisions rather than over-segmenting from day one, which tends to produce more content variants than a marketing team can realistically maintain.