Stage 4: Build & delivery (4a Build, 4b Engagement lead)

Detail for stage 4 of e2e-stages. The stage runs from a signed SOW to a portal the client accepts. It has two halves that need different skills, and the aim is that one person holds both: no PM/coder split. You own stage 4 when you are at level 2 on both halves, on the same engagement.

Who is developing here (from e2e-stages):

4b Engagement lead: Ola (main move, starting with JoPACC), and possibly Daniela. João is already engagement lead on NGED (National Grid) and MoEI. Luccas is developing in 2/2a instead (decided 2026-09-28).
4a Build: Daniela, possibly Monika, Osahon to a small extent. Luccas to evaluate.

The flow

  signed SOW (from 3 / 3a)
          │
          ▼
  ┌─ 4b ENGAGEMENT LEAD (client side) ───────────────────────┐
  │                                                          │
  │   4b.1 Kick off & plan    plan the client agrees         │
  │   4b.2 Run the cadence    weekly update, demo, risks     │
  │   4b.3 Guard scope        in scope, or change request    │
  │   4b.4 Review & accept    review cycles, sign-off        │
  │   4b.5 Lead the team      people + agents, throughout    │
  │                                                          │
  └──────────┬────────────────────────────────▲──────────────┘
    what to  │                                │ what's done,
    build    ▼                                │ what's hard
  ┌─ 4a BUILD (engineering; agents do the labour) ───────────┐
  │                                                          │
  │   4a.1 Architecture call                                 │
  │   4a.2 Data               migrate, harvest, schema       │
  │   4a.3 Features & design  search, charts, brand          │
  │   4a.4 Harden & stage     QA, quality bar, staging       │
  │                                                          │
  └────────────────────────────┬─────────────────────────────┘
                               ▼
     4b.6 Hand over into 5 (launch & run) and 6 (renewal)

4b Engagement lead

What it is: being the one accountable name the client deals with during delivery. You turn the SOW into a plan, keep the client informed and deciding, guard the scope, lead the team, and get sign-off.

sub-step	owns it (level 2) when they…	evidence	judgement that stays human
4b.1 Kick off & plan	run the kickoff and turn the SOW into a milestone plan the client agrees to, naming the client's decision-makers and reviewers	kickoff notes; plan agreed in writing	what to tackle first; what the client really needs versus what the SOW says
4b.2 Run the cadence	send a regular (e.g. weekly) update and demo, with progress, risks and decisions needed, without being chased	the update series; demo recordings or notes	what to raise, and when
4b.3 Guard scope	triage every client request as in scope or a change request, and route change requests through change control (3a) rather than absorbing them silently	change-request log; any change orders	what is in scope; when to give something away and when to charge
4b.4 Review & accept	run structured client review cycles and get written sign-off against the SOW	review feedback log; sign-off email or document	when the work is actually done
4b.5 Lead the team	allocate the work across people and agents, unblock, and hold the quality bar	task board; the team's view	who does what; when output is good enough to put our name on
4b.6 Hand over	hand over into launch & run (5) and the client relationship (6), noting renewal and expansion signals	handover note; expansion notes in Twenty	what to promise next

Escalation (guardrail). Tell Rufus or Anuar early when margin, scope or the relationship is at risk. Escalating is part of owning it, not a failure.

A good sign it's real: the client emails them first, not Rufus or someone else.

4a Build

What it is: building the portal, with agents doing the labour and the operator making the calls and checking the output. For commercial people (Daniela, Monika), the aim is not hand-coding. It is to specify, direct and review agent-built work well enough to stand behind it.

sub-step	owns it (level 2) when they…	evidence	judgement that stays human
4a.1 Architecture call	choose the stack and shape (PortalJS, CKAN, Arc hosting, integrations) and write it down in a page	architecture note	which architecture fits
4a.2 Data	run the migration or harvest, define the metadata schema, map to DCAT where needed, and check data quality	migrated catalogue; schema; QA report	what "good enough" data looks like
4a.3 Features & design	build custom features (search, charts, maps, integrations) and apply the client's brand, using the PortalJS skills	feature list delivered; design screenshots	design quality; avoiding competent-but-generic output
4a.4 Harden & stage	harden a 2a PoC or rebuild it, test it, pass the quality bar and accessibility checks, and deploy to staging	staging URL; checks passed; review notes	when to throw a PoC away

Quality bar. Osahon owns the quality bar (training). Level 2 in 4a means work passes that bar with a builder reviewing it, not doing it.

Levels

Counted per engagement or major milestone, not per week, since delivery is lumpier than outbound. The markers are suggestions, to calibrate.

level	4b Engagement lead	4a Build
0 Not yet	has not led client-facing delivery work	has not built on a client project
1 With help	runs parts (e.g. the weekly update, reviews) while someone else holds the relationship	builds parts with a builder alongside doing the hard calls
2 Owns it	named client lead for one engagement or major milestone, from kickoff to sign-off, with a change-request log (no silent scope creep)	delivers a milestone to staging, directing agents, passing the quality bar with review only
3 Improves it	owns it, and improves the kit: acceptance workflow, update template, change-request intake	owns it, and improves the kit: a PortalJS skill, hardening checklist, regression case

Pairing: learn the other half on the same engagement

The gaps are mirror images, so pair people on one engagement, each leading the half they are learning and backing up the other:

pair	learning 4b (leads client side)	learning 4a (leads build)
e.g. one engagement	Ola	Daniela or Monika

João is the in-house model for 4b. Ola can learn from how he runs NGED and MoEI while she leads JoPACC.

Each person takes the lead in their learning half, and the other acts as the safety net. Swap on the next engagement. This is the fastest route to one person holding both halves, and it avoids reintroducing the PM/coder split, since both people do both halves over time.

Starting points (first read, to confirm with each person)

person	4a	4b	first aim
Ola	2? (product)	0	engagement lead on JoPACC (Jordan Payments); João as the model to ask
Luccas	2?	0	not a 4b focus for now (developing in 2/2a); evaluate 4a depth
João	2? (Canada)	2 (NGED, MoEI)	4b level 3: turn how he runs NGED and MoEI into the kit (update and acceptance templates), and let Ola shadow him
Daniela	2? (Arc PoC)	?	the Swiss deal: harden her own PoC (4a.4) and lead the client (4b)
Monika	1?	2?-like skills	4a level 1: direct agents on one feature with a builder reviewing
Osahon	?	?	agent fluency in 4a first

Kit: what exists, what to build

From training module 4.

kit	supports	status
PortalJS skill chain end-to-end, tested on 3 past engagements	4a	?
PoC-to-production hardening checklist	4a.4	?
client review & acceptance workflow tied to the SOW	4b.4	?
change-request intake feeding 3a change control	4b.3	?
kickoff and plan template	4b.1	not in training yet
weekly client update template	4b.2	not in training yet

Open questions

Which engagements are the first practice ground for 4b, and does the Swiss deal count for Daniela?
Luccas and 4a: how do we evaluate whether he's more effective there?
Does pairing need a cost cap? Two people on one engagement costs more until the learning pays off.