Skip to content

Approach

Every stage closes on something you can reject.

Aevis runs delivery as a sequence of reviewable stages rather than a percentage. Each one hands over an artefact — a design, a runbook, a measured baseline — that a client can read, disagree with and sign off before the next begins.

  • Discover
  • Design
  • Build
  • Operate

What the method rests on

Four decisions taken once, so they are not re-argued weekly.

These constrain how an engagement is scoped and staffed. They are the reason the stages look the way they do.

  • The process before the platform

    We establish who owns a decision and what the workflow actually is before configuring anything. A platform built around an undecided process encodes the indecision and charges twice to undo it.

  • Reviewable output over reported progress

    A stage is complete when it has produced something inspectable. Percentages are a summary of work; artefacts are evidence of it, and only one of the two can be wrong quietly.

  • Supported patterns over clever ones

    Customisation is debt taken on the client’s behalf. Where we depart from the supported pattern we record why, and what it would cost to reverse.

  • Designed for the handover

    Documentation, runbooks and access are built during delivery rather than assembled at the end, because an engagement that cannot be handed over has not finished.

The eight stages

What happens, in order, and what you get at each step.

Not every engagement uses all eight — a managed service starts further along than a greenfield build — but the order does not change, and no stage is skipped silently.

  • Discovery

    Establish the current state: what runs, who owns it, where the work actually slows down, and which constraints are real rather than assumed.

    What you get to review

    Current-state assessment and a prioritised list of what is worth doing first.

    Who is involved

    Process owners, platform administrators, service management.

  • Design

    Agree the target operating model and the technical design against it, including the integration boundaries and what stays authoritative where.

    What you get to review

    Solution design with decisions recorded against their rationale.

    Who is involved

    Architecture, security, and the accountable business owner.

  • Plan

    Sequence the work into releases the organisation can absorb, with the dependencies, risks and rollback positions stated.

    What you get to review

    Release plan, RAID log and an agreed definition of done.

    Who is involved

    Delivery management and the client’s change function.

  • Implementation

    Build and configure against the agreed design, protecting upgradeability and recording any departure from the supported pattern.

    What you get to review

    Working configuration in a non-production environment, with the design decisions traced.

    Who is involved

    Platform engineers and the client’s technical reviewers.

  • Integration

    Connect the systems the workflow needs, and prove the data contract in both directions rather than only the happy path.

    What you get to review

    Tested interfaces with failure behaviour documented.

    Who is involved

    Integration owners on both sides of each interface.

  • Validation

    Test against the acceptance criteria agreed at design, including the security and performance criteria, not only the functional ones.

    What you get to review

    Test evidence and an explicit list of what was not covered.

    Who is involved

    Client testers, security, and service acceptance.

  • Transition

    Move the service into operation with the runbooks, access, monitoring and support model in place before go-live rather than after it.

    What you get to review

    Runbooks, support model and an agreed responsibility boundary in writing.

    Who is involved

    Service desk, operations and the incoming service owner.

  • Operations and optimisation

    Run the service against its commitments, measure how it is actually used, and resolve the friction that suppresses adoption.

    What you get to review

    Service reporting against a measured baseline, with an improvement backlog.

    Who is involved

    Named service owner and the client’s service management.

How the work is governed

The commitments that hold when a delivery goes badly.

A method is tested by what it does under pressure. These are the parts that do not flex.

  • A written responsibility boundary

    Every engagement states what Aevis operates and what remains with the client, before work begins. Ambiguity here is what turns an incident into an argument.

  • A named owner who can be escalated to

    Managed engagements carry a named service owner with the authority to commit. Accountability that routes to a mailbox is not accountability.

  • Reporting against a baseline we measured

    Service reporting is set against a baseline taken during transition, so improvement claims can be checked rather than asserted.

  • An exit that does not depend on goodwill

    Documentation, access and knowledge transfer are contractual deliverables maintained throughout, not a closing task. A client can leave.

Scope, commercial model and service levels are always confirmed against your environment during scoping. Nothing on this page is an offer or a guarantee of outcome.

Try it on something real

Bring the delivery that is not going well.

The method is easiest to judge against a specific problem. Tell us what is stuck, and we will set out how the first two stages would run against your estate.