Choosing the implementation partner
I evaluate who actually builds it. The stack, Medusa v2 and Next.js, was chosen deliberately as a flagship reference build, not a one-off. The third-party team was selected against that brief.
Client work · workwear
Architect and advisor, not the builder.
A workwear B2B distributor needed a B2B trade portal, an ERP evaluation, and a Shopify replacement. I ran a Clarity Audit, then Deliver Consultancy: vendor requirements, procurement, and integration architecture.
The engagement shape
- Role
- Architect and advisor. Third-party team builds.
- Stack
- Medusa v2 and Next.js
- Structure
- 12-month minimum retainer
- Status
- Live and ongoing
Architecture · DO-ART-101
Trade ordering, target state.
Cobra’s customer-facing, business-systems and production zones feed into one specified spine. I scope and oversee it. The implementation partner builds it.
What the engagement covers01 · Vendor selection 02 · Process design 03 · Implementation oversight
Three dimensions of an advisory-only build.
Vendor requirements and procurement
I write the requirements the trade portal and ERP evaluation actually need to answer, then run procurement against them, rather than accepting the first plausible platform.
Integration architecture, ongoing
I stay involved weekly across the build, checking the integration architecture holds as the implementation partner delivers. Not a one-off sign-off at the start.
The commercial shape
Restructured from an initial six-month framing to a twelve-month minimum retainer: the full build across the first four months, then ongoing weekly involvement. I name it here only as a shape, not a price. Pricing detail stays out of public case studies.
What's still in progress
The engagement is live and ongoing, not a completed, closed project.
Evaluating an ERP or platform decision?
For a diagnosis of what your own ERP or platform situation needs, book a Clarity Audit.