1. Methodology Overview
We employ an iterative methodology with phased delivery specifically adapted for enterprise platform rebuilds. Our experienced team's deep expertise in Laravel and Vue.js enables efficient delivery without sacrificing quality.
Core Principles
1
Efficient Execution
Experienced developers deliver faster
2
Iterative Delivery
Working software every 2-4 weeks
3
Collaboration
Regular stakeholder touchpoints
4
Risk Mitigation
Critical path features prioritized
5
Quality First
Automated testing throughout
2. Team Structure
Core Team
┌─────────────────┐ ┌─────────────────┐
│ Project Manager │ │ Product Manager │
│ (Full-time) │ │ (Part-time) │
└────────┬────────┘ └────────┬────────┘
└──────────────┬───────────────┘
│
┌───────────────────────┼───────────────────────┐
│ │ │
┌────────▼────────┐ ┌────────▼────────┐ ┌────────▼────────┐
│ Solutions │ │ Tech Lead │ │ UX/UI Lead │
│ Architect │ │ (Full-time) │ │ (Part-time) │
│ (Part-time) │ └────────┬────────┘ └─────────────────┘
└─────────────────┘ │
│
┌───────────────────────┼───────────────────────┐
│ │ │
┌────────▼────────┐ ┌────────▼────────┐ ┌────────▼────────┐
│ Sr. Full-Stack │ │ Sr. Full-Stack │ │ Full-Stack │
│ Developer 1 │ │ Developer 2 │ │ Developer │
│ (Full-time) │ │ (Full-time) │ │ (Full-time) │
└─────────────────┘ └─────────────────┘ └─────────────────┘
│
┌────────▼────────┐
│ QA Lead │
│ (Full-time) │
└─────────────────┘
Team Roles
| Role | Responsibility | Allocation |
|---|---|---|
| Project Manager | Delivery, communication, timeline | 100% |
| Product Manager | Requirements, backlog prioritization, stakeholder alignment | 50% |
| Solutions Architect | System design, integrations, security | 40% |
| Tech Lead | Code quality, technical decisions, mentoring | 100% |
| Senior Full-Stack (x2) | Core feature development, complex features | 100% each |
| Full-Stack Developer | Feature development, bug fixes | 100% |
| UX/UI Designer | User experience, interface design | 50% |
| QA Lead | Test strategy, automation, UAT | 100% |
Why This Team Works
Our team's efficiency comes from:
- Deep Laravel Expertise – Senior developers with 5+ years Laravel experience
- Proven Patterns – Reusable architectures from similar enterprise builds
- Efficient Communication – Lean team means fewer coordination overhead
- Quality Focus – Experienced developers write better code the first time
3. Communication Plan
Regular Meetings
| Meeting | Frequency | Attendees | Duration |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standup | Daily | Dev team | 15 min |
| Sprint Demo | Bi-weekly | All stakeholders | 1 hour |
| Sprint Planning | Bi-weekly | Core team + Product | 2 hours |
| Steering Committee | Monthly | Leadership | 1 hour |
| Technical Review | As needed | Architects | 1-2 hours |
Reporting
| Report | Frequency | Content |
|---|---|---|
| Status Report | Weekly | Progress, blockers, next steps |
| Sprint Report | Bi-weekly | Completed items, velocity, burndown |
| Risk Report | Monthly | Updated risk register, mitigations |
Tools
| Purpose | Tool |
|---|---|
| Project Management | Jira or Azure DevOps |
| Documentation | Confluence or Notion |
| Communication | Slack or Teams |
| Code Repository | GitHub |
| Design | Figma |
4. Quality Assurance
Testing Strategy
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ Testing Pyramid │ │ │ │ ┌─────┐ │ │ │ E2E │ (Cypress) │ │ │ │ ~50 critical paths │ │ ┌─┴─────┴─┐ │ │ │ Integ │ (Laravel Feature Tests) │ │ │ Tests │ ~200 API tests │ │ ┌─┴─────────┴─┐ │ │ │ Unit │ (PHPUnit/Pest + Vitest) │ │ │ Tests │ ~80% code coverage │ │ └─────────────┘ │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Quality Gates
| Gate | Criteria |
|---|---|
| Code Review | All PRs require 1 approval |
| Unit Tests | 80% coverage minimum |
| Integration Tests | All API endpoints covered |
| E2E Tests | Critical user journeys pass |
| Security Scan | No high/critical vulnerabilities |
| Performance | Page load < 2s, API < 200ms |
5. Risk Management
Risk Register (Top 10)
| # | Risk | Probability | Impact | Mitigation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Data migration complexity | High | High | Early migration POC, iterative approach |
| 2 | Scope creep | Medium | High | Change control process, backlog grooming |
| 3 | Integration delays | Medium | Medium | Sandbox access early, mock services |
| 4 | Key person dependency | Low | High | Knowledge sharing, documentation |
| 5 | Legacy system access | Medium | Medium | Early access request, fallback plans |
| 6 | Performance issues | Low | Medium | Load testing throughout |
| 7 | Security vulnerabilities | Low | High | Security reviews, penetration testing |
| 8 | User adoption resistance | Medium | Medium | Training, change management |
| 9 | Timeline compression | Low | Medium | Buffer time, prioritization framework |
| 10 | Vendor dependency | Low | Low | Multi-vendor strategy |
6. Change Management
Change Control Process
- Request – Formal change request submitted
- Assess – Impact analysis (scope, timeline)
- Review – Change board evaluation
- Approve/Reject – Decision documented
- Implement – If approved, added to backlog
- Communicate – Stakeholders informed
Change Categories
| Category | Approval | Timeline Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Minor (< 8 hours) | Tech Lead | None |
| Standard (8-40 hours) | PM + Tech Lead | May affect sprint |
| Major (> 40 hours) | Steering Committee | Likely affects milestones |
| Emergency | PM (with justification) | Immediate |
7. Training & Transition
Training Plan
| User Group | Format | Duration | Timing |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admin Master | On-site workshop | 1 day | Week 29 |
| Regional Managers | Virtual sessions | 2 hours | Week 29-30 |
| Trainers | Self-paced + webinar | 2 hours | Week 30 |
| Program Managers | Virtual sessions | 1 hour | Week 30 |
| Parents | In-app guides + FAQ | Self-service | Go-live |
8. Success Criteria
Go-Live Readiness
| Criterion | Measure |
|---|---|
| All P1 features complete | 100% |
| UAT sign-off | All user groups |
| Data migration verified | 100% accuracy on sample |
| Performance benchmarks met | P95 within targets |
| Security audit passed | No critical findings |
| Training completed | All admin users |
| Rollback plan tested | Successfully demonstrated |
Project Success Metrics
| Metric | Target | Measurement |
|---|---|---|
| On-time delivery | November 11, 2026 | Actual go-live date |
| Functionality | 100% RFP requirements | Feature checklist |
| User satisfaction | > 4.0/5.0 | Post-launch survey |
| System stability | 99.9% uptime | First 90 days |
| Adoption | 80% active users | 90-day usage |