What Organisations Say After Working With Us
We do not ask for testimonials. These are perspectives that clients have shared of their own accord, offered here without embellishment.
← Back to HomeFrom the People We Work With
"The journey paper gave us a common language across departments that we had never quite had before. Sales and service were describing the same customer experience in entirely different terms — the paper resolved that. We still reference the diagrams in meetings nine months later."
Norizan Zainal
Head of Customer Experience, Financial Services — Petaling Jaya
April 2025
"I expected a generic report. What we received was a document that clearly reflected our specific situation — the systems we actually use, the workflows our team actually follows. The data architecture paper identified three integration gaps we had known about anecdotally but had never seen documented. That documentation alone was worth the engagement."
Rajendran Chelliah
VP Technology, Insurance Group — Kuala Lumpur
March 2025
"Our onboarding process had been patched so many times that nobody had a clear view of the whole thing. The two-day workshop was well-facilitated — the team felt heard, which is not always the case when consultants are in the room. The service brief that followed gave our delivery team a clean starting point they could actually use."
Lim Wei Ling
Service Operations Manager, Telecom — Shah Alam
April 2025
"We had worked with larger advisory firms before and received polished presentations that were difficult to act on. Pintar Partners produced a written paper that our internal team could read independently, share with the board, and use as the basis for a proper technology roadmap. The transparency of their process was also different — we knew what was happening at each stage."
Faridah Hassan
Chief Operating Officer, Healthcare Administration — KL
February 2025
"The pricing was a pleasant surprise. RM 890 for a journey conversation that involved real preparation and multiple sessions felt fair. We did not feel we were being charged for general discussion dressed up as advisory work. The output was specific to our situation, not a template with our name on the cover."
Kumar Pravin
Director of Operations, Professional Services — Cyberjaya
May 2025
"What I valued most was that the workshop did not feel like a consultant leading our team through their methodology. It felt like a structured conversation that respected what our team already knew. The service brief that came out of it was, in many ways, our team's thinking — just organised and written down properly."
Siti Balkish
Claims Service Lead, General Insurance — Kuala Lumpur
April 2025
Three Engagement Summaries
Organisation names and identifying details have been changed or withheld at client request.
Challenge
A mid-size financial services organisation had grown its customer channels — branch, web, mobile, and contact centre — over a decade without a unified view of the journey. Each channel team understood its own piece. No written account of the end-to-end experience existed.
Approach
A Customer Journey Conversation engagement over four weeks. Sessions with eight stakeholders across four departments. Desk review of available process documentation prior to the first session.
Outcome
A 24-page journey paper with annotated diagrams identifying eleven friction points across the four channels. The paper was subsequently used as the briefing document for a CRM evaluation process. Engagement fee: RM 890.
"The paper gave us something we had been trying to produce internally for two years. Having an outside party do the reading and write it neutrally made it easier for all departments to accept."
— Head of Digital, Financial Services Organisation, KL, March 2025
Challenge
A regional telecommunications group operated four distinct customer data platforms — a legacy CRM, a marketing automation tool, a service desk, and a loyalty programme database. Customer records were duplicated across all four with no reconciliation logic.
Approach
A Customer Data Architecture Advisory over seven weeks. Architecture mapping sessions with the technology, marketing, and service operations teams. Integration layer reviewed with the platform engineering leads.
Outcome
A 42-page architecture paper cataloguing 17 identified integration gaps and 4 critical data duplication patterns. A sequenced eight-step recommendation for rationalisation. Engagement fee: RM 2,720.
"We knew the architecture was complicated. We did not know it was this complicated. The catalogue was uncomfortable reading, but it was exactly what we needed to take to the technology steering committee."
— VP Technology, Telecommunications Group, Shah Alam, February 2025
Challenge
A healthcare administration company had an onboarding service that had been redesigned piecemeal over three years. Key process knowledge resided in three senior team members who were approaching retirement. No current documentation existed.
Approach
A Service Design Workshop with eight operational team members over two days. The workshop was conducted on-site at the client's office in Bangsar. Session design prepared and shared with the team leader in advance.
Outcome
A 16-page written service brief delivered within five days of the workshop. The brief documented the current-state onboarding process, identified seven areas for refinement, and outlined an improved flow drawn from team consensus. Engagement fee: RM 1,180.
"The team left the two days feeling that their knowledge had been captured rather than assessed. That is a subtle but important distinction. The brief has become our onboarding reference document."
— COO, Healthcare Administration, Bangsar, April 2025
Office
Lot 5.08, Wisma Cosway
88 Jalan Raja Chulan
50200 Kuala Lumpur
Practice Indicators
6+
Years in practice
80+
Organisations engaged
4.8
Average client rating
94%
Second engagement rate