Skip to main content
/solutionsSolutions

Five problems we are asked to solve

These are the shapes most enquiries take. If yours is not here it is not unusual — it just means the conversation starts with a question rather than a proposal.

S-01

The business runs on spreadsheets that nobody dares change

Signals we hear

  • One file is the source of truth and it lives on somebody’s laptop
  • Reconciliation is a monthly ritual with a known error rate
  • New staff are trained on undocumented conventions

How we approach it

We model the domain the spreadsheet already encodes, migrate the data with reconciliation reports both sides can check, and deliver a system with roles, an audit trail and an export path. The spreadsheet stays available read-only through the transition, because a cutover nobody trusts gets reversed.

Relevant services

S-02

A single deployable has become impossible to release safely

Signals we hear

  • Releases are scheduled monthly and still slip
  • One team’s change breaks another team’s feature
  • Nobody can describe the blast radius of a deploy

How we approach it

Decomposition guided by data ownership, not by org chart. We extract the highest-friction boundary first, run it alongside the monolith behind a contract, and only then move the next one. The pipeline and observability come before the second extraction, not after the fifth.

Relevant services

S-03

Systems that should talk to each other are joined by manual work

Signals we hear

  • Data is re-keyed between an ERP, a CRM and a warehouse system
  • Integrations exist but fail silently and are noticed by customers
  • Nobody owns the contract between the two systems

How we approach it

A published contract first, then services that assume the counterpart will fail: explicit timeouts, idempotency keys, exponential backoff and a dead-letter path that a human can inspect. Integration monitoring is part of the deliverable, not a follow-up project.

Relevant services

S-04

A platform that works fine until the day it matters

Signals we hear

  • Performance degrades under campaign traffic
  • Capacity planning is a conversation, not a number
  • Scaling means a bigger server and hoping

How we approach it

We start from a measured baseline and an agreed latency budget, remove the state that prevents horizontal scaling, add read replicas and caching where profiling says they belong — not where intuition says — and leave you with a load-test suite you can rerun before every campaign.

Relevant services

S-05

An external party is about to audit software you inherited

Signals we hear

  • A customer’s security questionnaire has arrived
  • Dependencies have not been updated in years
  • No one currently at the company wrote the system

How we approach it

An evidenced audit against the OWASP ASVS checklist, a dependency and supply-chain review, and a remediation backlog ranked by consequence against effort — with the reasoning attached, so your team can argue with our ranking rather than accept it.

Relevant services

These are engineering approaches, not case studies. This site publishes no client names, logos or outcome figures, because we will not present results we cannot evidence to you on request.