Service
Most failed systems were specified accurately.
They still did not fit. The gap is almost always in what nobody thought to say out loud — which is what this work is for.
What you get
- Process map
- The process as it really runs, including the shortcut nobody documented and the person everyone quietly asks.
- Gap analysis
- Where the current way and the intended way diverge, and which of those gaps are worth closing with software.
- BRD
- One document both sides can argue against, written in the language of the operation rather than the system.
- Given / When / Then
- Requirements written so they can be tested. One version of done, agreed before anything is configured.
- UAT script
- A test the client runs themselves, against the criteria they signed, rather than watching a demo.
- Training material
- Written around the awkward cases — the refund, the split order, the thing that breaks on Fridays.
Why it decides the outcome
A requirement that cannot be tested cannot be signed off, and a system that was never signed off is one the team goes around. Writing acceptance criteria before configuration is the cheapest point at which a misunderstanding can still be fixed.
It also changes who is in control. When the client runs the UAT script against criteria they agreed, go-live stops being a decision taken on their behalf.
This work in practice
- Tyre & Tube manufacturer31 user stories restructured into criteria development and UAT could both run against.
- Global Shipping & LogisticsOn-site training across five modules for a team already live on a system nobody had shown them.
- Smart Laundry — UKIntake through to delivery mapped, then automated as defined stages.
Next
Analysis usually arrives attached to an implementation. Here is what the build side looks like.
- Business analysis
- Process mapping
- Gap analysis
- BRD
- Given / When / Then
- UAT
- Training