DebugInit
Connect fragmented teams, tools and data.
Create one role-based operational experience across existing systems before deciding what should be replaced.
Start with evidence, economics and operational risk—not technology hype.
When this fits
Four signals. If none of them describes your situation, this is not the engagement you need — and we would rather say so now.
The data exists but not together
Every answer requires opening four systems and a spreadsheet.
Roles span tools
A single job involves three interfaces, none of which was designed for it.
Reporting is reconciliation
Most of the reporting effort goes on making numbers agree.
Replacement is premature
You know the estate is wrong but not yet which part.
Method
Evidence first, then economics, then a decision. Reversing that order is how expensive mistakes get made.
- 01
Map the role, not the system
Start from what a person has to get done in a shift.
- 02
Define the contracts
What each system owns, what it publishes, and what it consumes.
- 03
Build the role workspace
One place to do the work, drawing on the systems that stay.
- 04
Reconcile the definitions
Agree what a customer, an order and an employee mean across systems.
- 05
Then decide
With one operational view in place, which system to retain or replace becomes evidence rather than opinion.
Deliverables
What you hold at the end, whether or not you continue with us.
- Role-based workspace
- In production, for at least one role, drawing on the existing estate.
- Integration contracts
- Documented interfaces and events between systems, owned rather than improvised.
- Shared definitions
- One agreed meaning per core entity, and where it is mastered.
- Operational view
- One place the state of the process is visible without opening four tools.
- Evidence for the next decision
- Usage and friction data that tells you which system to address first.
If the work leads you to a different vendor, it was still worth doing. That is the standard we hold it to.
Technology approach
API-first and event-driven, with the boundary between systems written as a contract rather than assumed. Where a system publishes events, we consume them; where it does not, the integration is explicit about what it is polling and why.
The role workspace is where consolidation is felt first, and it is reversible. If a later decision replaces one of the underlying systems, the person doing the work does not have to relearn anything.
Outcome measures
Baselined before the work starts and re-measured after. These are the measures; results belong to your engagement and are published only with evidence.
System switches
How many tools a person touches to finish one task.
Duplicate entry
Fields typed into more than one system.
Reconciliation effort
Hours spent making numbers agree.
Cycle time
Request to done across the whole process, not per system.
Data disagreement
How often systems hold conflicting values.
Adoption
Whether the workspace replaced the old path or was added beside it.
What we will not do
Where our incentive and your interest diverge, written down before you have to work it out.
- Screen-scrape
- If a system has no usable interface, we say so rather than build something that breaks on their next release.
- Recommend replacement first
- Connect, observe, then decide. Deciding first is how estates get replaced twice.
- Claim a connector we have not built
- Integrations are described by category until a specific one is production-ready.
- Move data we do not need
- Every copy is a liability. We integrate the minimum that makes the process work.
If an assessment concludes the honest recommendation is to change nothing, that is a valid result and we will say it.
Start with an assessment
Fixed scope, defined deliverables, and findings you own regardless of what you decide to do next.