Most organisations don't have that picture. They have estimates, opinions, and a general sense that things are harder than they should be. What they rarely have is an independent view from someone who isn't carrying the history of how things got this way — someone without a stake in the current architecture, who's been close enough to similar situations to know where the real leverage points are. Without that clarity, you're making significant decisions about investment, priorities, and team structure without the information those decisions require. The remediation goes in the wrong direction, or addresses the wrong things first, or solves surface problems while the structural condition keeps producing new ones. The path from "we know something's wrong" to "here's specifically what's wrong and what to do about it" doesn't have to be as long or as expensive as most organisations assume.