Joel Dehlin

Zero code administration of the Redwood Quoting interface is now available. This includes a one-click migration from the JET UI to Redwood.

126

7 Comments

Missed checks? Unlogged issues? Half-done tasks? It’s not a lack of effort... it’s a lack of visibility. When handovers rely on memory or sticky notes, things slip. EviView makes shift transitions: 1.  Clear 2.  Trackable 3.  Consistent No more guesswork. Just smooth, reliable handovers.

20

Try asking a tailor for an off-the-rack suit, but custom-made. Sounds confusing, right? Operators ask providers the same thing. First, the request is a "template" solution, usually pointing to a GEO where they’ve seen it perform. Providers roll it out. And the same operators open 250 tickets the next day after signing: “Add a bonus flow like our competitor’s.” “Integrate this new PSP by next week.” “Why can’t we change the margins by ourselves?” Half of those requests are dev-heavy, and all of them are urgent. Is it still a template? Or already a custom build? After a while, the lines blur completely. The only thing that works is partnership. We’ve seen it work with GR8 Tech clients: collaborating closely on processes that actually keep the business moving. #sportsbook #igamingplatform #casinogames #bettingprovider

20

There’s a lot of noise right now around the $100,000 H-1B fee. But organizations can respond with clarity and choice.     If that fee breaks the model for your business, you can still access the skills you need (today!) quickly through an EOR. Then, you can decide later whether you want to shift to an entity as the market and your team mature. We’ll help you do both.    One thing we can always count on in the business world is complexity. Whether it’s navigating policy shifts, exits, or right-sizing, organizations need a compliant way forward. That’s where a full-service model delivers.    I’m sharing a few practical steps you can take to your exec team. If this fee has your board rethinking hiring plans, now is the time to weigh the options. The good news is: You have them.   #H1B #EmployerOfRecord #FutureOfWork 

169

4 Comments

Great reporting by Amanda Gerut in Fortune. A six‑week, $2k contract on a gig economy platform let a North Korean operative log straight into an Oregon state legislature campaign site. No spear‑phish, no zero‑day. Just a phone interview, a subcontractor, and a shared password.   This gig platform does have an identity verification process, in which a freelancer scans a photo ID and takes a selfie to prove their identity. I've not seen any reporting on whether or not this particular freelancer had gone through that process. But in a way it doesn't matter. Point-in-time IDV would have failed to stop this infiltration, because the contractor simply shared handed WordPress credentials to a "subcontractor" that the Oregon-based campaign team had never met.   So what can we really learn from this story? I don't think it's as simple as "the developer shouldn't have shared their credentials."   Thinking on this quote from Michael B. at DTEX Systems:   “You can do all the right things to verify workers but the second you outsource something” there can be lapses in policies and procedures, said Barnhart. “They love to do these things through a third party.”   The reality is that security teams need to account for this type of risk. IDV at account opening is necessary, but if IT has configured your systems to fall back on passwords for re-authentication, you're going to run into situations like this.   What could really stop this? I'd argue re-authentication.   • Protect the entire account lifecycle, not just the first interaction. • Re‑verify likeness and liveness at each critical moment: onboarding, account recovery, privileged actions, data export, etc. • Flag mismatches or suspicious activity in real time to trigger automatic re-verification with IDV.   This is basically how we built Nametag to protect accounts. User authentication goes from a one‑time action into an ongoing assurance by covering the entire user journey: from onboarding through account recovery and step-up authentication.   Thank you, Amanda, for shining light on a problem moving faster than most risk models! Our approach to identity security has to move just as fast. https://lnkd.in/dEZEdtxr

20

One of the biggest reasons companies hesitate to modernize legacy applications? Downtime. Not the kind you read about in theory— But the kind that halts revenue, frustrates users, and sets off fire drills across every department. And that fear is real. When your legacy systems are deeply embedded powering billing, inventory, or critical customer experiences, even a few hours of disruption can have ripple effects. But here’s what I often tell clients: 🛠️ Modernization doesn’t have to be a “big bang.” Done right, it can be strategic, staged, and non-disruptive. So, what holds companies back?  • Fear of the unknown: What if something breaks? What if the new doesn’t work?  • Perceived risk: Business continuity feels too fragile to touch.  • Time and cost concerns: “We can’t afford the effort."  • Lack of a skilled team or the right partner: Talent gaps slow everything down.  • No clear execution plan: Everyone agrees why, but no one knows how.  • And worst of all? Paralysis by analysis, so much thinking, zero action. But here's what has worked for companies that chose to move forward: ✅ Strangle the monolith – Isolate and rebuild one function at a time as a microservice, only when it adds value. (Yes, microservices are great but they’re not always cheap or necessary.) ✅ Shadow deployments – Run modern systems alongside legacy apps to validate behavior in real-time. ✅ Canary rollouts – Start small. Roll out to 5% of users. Observe. Adjust. Then scale. ✅ Robust rollback plans – Have a Plan B that’s as solid as your Plan A. Confidence comes from preparation. ⚡ The risk of downtime is real. But the bigger risk is standing still while your competitors modernize, innovate, and move ahead. If you’re planning modernization in 2025, make sure your strategy is built around resilience, not just release dates. Because the right time to start… is before it’s too late.

27

2 Comments

If you've ever sat in a meeting room with executives playing "pick a color" risk management ("Is cybersecurity red or yellow this quarter?") and I sure have, this one's for you. If you're just joining: I'm sharing 32 specific mindset shifts from my upcoming book that help risk professionals transition from traditional risk management (heat maps, gut feelings) to decision-based risk using quantification. We're in THEME 3: EVIDENCE & REASONING - shifting from gut instinct to systematic thinking that actually improves decision-making quality. This week we're tackling one of the most subtle barriers in risk management: the difference between getting everyone comfortable and getting closer to a good answer. 10. Agreement Seeking → Belief Updating Traditional Risk: Spend meetings negotiating until everyone can "live with" the risk rating. Success means the room agrees - whether it's "medium risk" or "7 out of 10." Decision-Based Risk: Focus on systematically updating beliefs when new evidence arrives. Start with your best estimate, then let each new data point refine your assessment rather than starting the negotiation over. Mindset Shift: Retrain your brain from asking "What can we all agree on?" to "What does this evidence tell us about our previous estimate?" When new information arrives, the goal isn't renewed consensus, it's improved accuracy. Here's what this looks like in practice: Instead of "Let's discuss whether this is still a medium risk," try "I estimated 30% likelihood last quarter, but this new threat intelligence suggests we should update to 40-45%. Here's why." The difference is profound. Agreement seeking optimizes for group comfort. Belief updating optimizes for getting closer to reality. One treats risk assessment as diplomacy, the other as systematic reasoning. Next week: We'll explore how superforecasting skills can transform individual expertise into disciplined prediction capabilities. #RiskManagement #RiskQuantification #CRQ #FAIR

80

5 Comments

After supporting hundreds of SMBs, I can tell you confidently: tech rarely fails before communication does. When a company brings us in, it’s rarely because the software is broken or the server is failing. It’s because somewhere along the way, the communication chain snapped. I see it happen like this: → Marketing launches a new tool → Operations doesn’t hear about it → HR assumes IT already knows → And IT is the last to get the memo Suddenly “IT is slow” or “IT didn’t set this up right” becomes the complaint. But the real issue was never the tech. It was the handoff. Technology breaks when people stop talking. That’s why the best MSP relationships don’t revolve around tickets. They revolve around alignment. Here’s what alignment looks like: → Understanding the business, not just the hardware → Knowing department goals before implementing solutions → Mapping workflows so tools don’t conflict → Giving teams one clear place to communicate changes → Creating systems that support the way people actually work When IT understands the story behind the decisions, everything smooths out: • Faster onboarding • Cleaner data • Fewer surprise issues • Lower friction between departments • And far less downtime This is the part most people overlook. You need better communication around the tools you already have. Every strong IT outcome starts with clarity. If you want to chat about why everything is breaking down, including your communication, send me a DM for a clarity call.

39

6 Comments