Tech PipelineSix kinds of work
These are the shapes engagements usually take. Most projects cross two or three of them because the problems do. Read them as problem descriptions, not product SKUs.
How to read this page
Each service below describes a type of work, when it usually comes up, and what actually lands when we are done. None of them are packaged offerings. A reporting cleanup almost always drags in integration work. A delivery restructure usually exposes ownership gaps.
The scoping call is where we figure out which two or three of these apply to your situation and how they fit together. What you read here is how we describe the work, not what a SOW looks like.
Systems and integration
What it is
Connecting the tools your team already runs on. Fixing the handoffs where data gets rekeyed, lost, or rebuilt in a spreadsheet.
When it comes up
When people are copying data between systems. When an integration failed two quarters ago and nobody fixed it. When a vendor tool is live but not talking to the one next to it.
What it covers
- •Integration design and API configuration
- •Data sync rules and conflict handling
- •Retiring spreadsheets that bridge system gaps
- •Error handling and reconciliation logic
What lands
- •Integration map showing what flows where
- •Built-out integrations or detailed build specs
- •Reconciliation process for the edge cases
- •SOPs for the operators running the new flow
What it pairs with
Pairs with reporting operations when the integration is what is breaking the numbers. Pairs with workflow redesign when the handoff is a process issue more than a technical one.
Reporting operations
What it is
Rebuilding the path from source system to the report leadership uses. Getting the numbers to match across functions and stop drifting every quarter.
When it comes up
When finance and operations report different numbers for the same thing. When someone spends two days a month assembling a deck that should update itself. When a metric changed definition and nobody can remember when.
What it covers
- •Metric definitions and ownership
- •Source-of-truth mapping across systems
- •Data pipeline reliability and refresh logic
- •Retiring manual exports and handmade dashboards
What lands
- •Metric dictionary with definitions and owners
- •Rebuilt pipelines that pull from the right source
- •Dashboard changes in your existing BI tool
- •Refresh schedule and failure alerting
What it pairs with
Almost always requires integration work upstream. Often triggers workflow redesign when the underlying process is what made the data bad.
Delivery and coordination
What it is
Putting structure around engineering, product, or operational delivery teams that are running too hot or too scattered. Intake, prioritization, cadence, and escalation.
When it comes up
When three backlogs exist for the same team. When roadmap commitments keep slipping and the reasons are different each time. When product and engineering plan on different timelines and meet in the middle during sprint reviews.
What it covers
- •Consolidating intake from multiple channels
- •Planning cadence and backlog hygiene
- •Dependencies between teams and vendors
- •Decision rights on scope and release
What lands
- •Single intake path with triage rules
- •Planning cadence that matches the delivery cycle
- •Escalation paths with named owners
- •Running log of decisions and tradeoffs
What it pairs with
Pulls in ownership and decision rights when the problem is who decides, not what. Pairs with reporting when leadership has no visibility into what is actually shipping.
Workflow and automation
What it is
Taking a recurring process that runs on email, ad-hoc meetings, and tribal knowledge, and moving it into a system where routing and exceptions are explicit.
When it comes up
When an approval queue lives in an inbox. When a month-end task is done differently depending on who is covering it. When vendor onboarding, expense review, or ticket routing has quietly become a full-time job for someone.
What it covers
- •Mapping the process as it actually runs today
- •Routing rules, approval logic, and SLAs
- •Exception paths for the edge cases
- •Configuration inside the tool you already own
What lands
- •Workflow configured in your existing platform
- •Written SOP for operators and approvers
- •Exception register with named decision makers
- •Metrics on cycle time and queue depth
What it pairs with
Often the endpoint of a reporting cleanup, because you cannot automate a process with no agreed definition. Feeds into ownership work when the routing reveals who really owns the step.
Ownership and decision rights
What it is
Naming the team and person responsible for each system, process, metric, and escalation. Removing the overlap where two groups share a task and neither one does it reliably.
When it comes up
When the same escalation lands on the same three people regardless of topic. When nobody owns the vendor relationship for a tool critical to the business. When a process has three people who partially do it and none who own it.
What it covers
- •System ownership across business and IT
- •Process ownership for recurring workflows
- •Metric and report ownership
- •Escalation paths and fallback coverage
What lands
- •RACI at the level of system, process, and metric
- •Published escalation paths
- •Named fallback owners for coverage gaps
- •Agreement on who signs off on what
What it pairs with
Surfaces during almost every engagement. Usually paired with workflow or delivery work once the ownership question is settled.
Operational stabilization
What it is
Rebuilding the baseline when a process has degraded into firefighting. Getting it back to running quietly, with documented exceptions and a team that knows what steady state looks like.
When it comes up
After a migration that left the team running two systems. After a reorg that split a process across functions. After a departure that took the undocumented knowledge with them.
What it covers
- •Incident and exception review
- •Baseline process definition
- •SOP rewrite and operator training
- •Metrics that flag drift before it becomes an outage
What lands
- •Written baseline of the working state
- •Rewritten SOPs matching the actual flow
- •Training sessions for current and backup operators
- •Leading indicators for early-warning on drift
What it pairs with
Often starts as a stabilization project and uncovers ownership, integration, or reporting work that has to be done alongside it.
The shapes that kick off most engagements
A migration stalled halfway
The new system went live, the old one never got turned off, and now the team maintains both. Data lives in two places. Reports pull from whichever one people trust that day.
The close keeps slipping
Month-end takes longer each quarter. The reasons change. Upstream data is late. Reconciliations are manual. Someone is always fixing something on the last day.
A tool you bought is only partially used
The contract is in place. A few teams adopted it. Others route around it. The gap between what was purchased and what is in production keeps growing.
Delivery is running on three backlogs
Product, engineering, and a PMO tool each hold a different version of what is planned. Commitments get made against whichever one is open in that meeting.
A key operator is the system
One person knows how the process runs. They have been there four years. Documentation is out of date. Coverage for vacation is a group anxiety.
What you walk away with
Written diagnosis
A short document that names the break points, where they are, and what is holding the current patch in place. Specific enough to disagree with.
Sequenced fixes
What to do first, what can wait, and what to leave alone. Tied to the tools you already run and the team you already have.
Built changes
Integrations wired up. Dashboards rebuilt. Workflows configured in your platform. SOPs rewritten against the actual flow.
Trained operators
The person taking over after us has run the process under our supervision. They know the edge cases and the fallback paths.
Decision log
A record of why things were built the way they were. Keeps the next person from unwinding a decision they do not have context on.
The mix depends on the engagement. Some projects end at diagnosis because the fix belongs to your team. Others go through build and cutover. Either way, the exit point is when the work runs without us.
Describe the problem, not the service
Tell us what breaks, when it breaks, and who has been working around it. We will tell you which of these six this probably is, or whether it is something we do not do.