The order doesn't change between projects. How long each stage takes does: a small internal tool might spend a week in discovery, a platform with three user types might spend six.
We meet the people involved, map how work moves today, and identify where it breaks down. Nothing is designed until the problem is clear.
Discovery ends with a written scope. The list of things we agreed not to build is usually as long as the list of things we will.
We define the data model and how it connects to what you already use. Technology is chosen for the problem, not for fashion.
You see how every part connects before a line of production code is written.
We design the interface around real tasks, starting with the smallest screen. Staff click through it before anything is engineered.
You review and click through the product before development begins.
We build in staged releases so you see working software early and often. Every stage is tested before the next begins.
Changes are expected. Staged delivery makes them manageable.
We deploy to production and plan the cutover for a quiet day, so work is not interrupted.
Your team is trained and everything is documented.
Launch is not the end of the relationship. We maintain what we built and extend it as your needs change.
The roadmap is reviewed together, on a regular rhythm.
Most projects that go wrong go wrong in the first two stages, and the damage only shows up during the build, when changing course costs the most. Spending longer on discovery feels slow. It is the cheapest part of the project to get right.
Describe the problem in your own words. You don't need to know what technology it needs.