Skip to main content

Reference solution patterns

Systems for the work that does not fit inside a template.

The examples below are reference solution patterns — not claims about named clients or off-the-shelf products. They show how Kerah approaches recurring operational needs. Each real engagement begins by defining the users, constraints, integrations, data and outcomes.

Reading the diagrams

  • Arrives from outside
  • System step
  • Person decides
  • Data at rest
  • Leaves the system

Each diagram is a structural sketch, not a specification. The point of interest is usually where a person still decides, and where data comes to rest.

Reference solution pattern

Operations Portal

The recurring need is a single place where work is visible, assigned, actioned and recorded — replacing a spreadsheet, a shared inbox and a set of habits. The difficulty is rarely the screens. It is the permission model, the audit history and the reporting that has to come from the same data people work in.

Modules in this pattern

  • Secure user and role management
  • Requests and task queues
  • Approvals and escalation
  • Dashboards and reporting
  • Notifications
  • Documents and audit history
  • Integrations with existing systems

Questions to settle early

  • Whose authority applies at each approval step, and what happens when that person is unavailable
  • How much history must be retained, and for how long
  • Whether reporting needs to be real-time or is better served by a defined cut-off
  • How access is reviewed and revoked as people change roles

Usually involves: Enterprise Systems, Discovery and Architecture

Discuss a problem like this

Work enters a queue, is actioned under role-based access, and leaves a record that reporting draws from.

Reference solution pattern

Case and Request Management

Where an organization receives requests it must assess and answer, the system's real job is evidence. Every case needs a state, an owner, the documents it was decided on and a record of why. Service levels and escalation logic then sit on top of that foundation rather than being bolted to a tracker.

Modules in this pattern

  • Configurable intake
  • Case status and assignment
  • Service levels and escalation logic
  • Evidence and document records
  • Correspondence
  • Complete decision history
  • Management reporting

Questions to settle early

  • Whether intake needs to change without a code release, and who is trusted to change it
  • How escalation behaves outside working hours
  • What must be disclosed to the requester, and when
  • Retention and deletion rules for evidence attached to a closed case

Usually involves: Enterprise Systems, Discovery and Architecture

Discuss a problem like this

Intake channels converge on one case record; assessment, correspondence and escalation all write to its history.

Reference solution pattern

Document Intake and AI Triage

Documents arrive in inconsistent formats, sometimes in more than one language, and someone reads each one to decide where it goes. Automation helps here, but only with validation, duplicate handling and an explicit human approval point. The traceable output matters as much as the extraction.

Modules in this pattern

  • Secure upload and capture
  • Extraction and validation
  • Classification
  • Duplicate and exception handling
  • Human approval
  • Workflow routing
  • Traceable outputs

Questions to settle early

  • Which fields may be accepted automatically and which always require review
  • What happens to a document the system cannot classify confidently
  • Whether document content may leave your environment, and under what agreement
  • How an extraction decision is evidenced months later

Usually involves: AI and Intelligent Automation, Enterprise Systems

Discuss a problem like this

Extraction and classification propose; validation and human approval decide; every output is traceable.

Reference solution pattern

Bilingual Digital Experience

A bilingual product is not a translated product. Direction affects layout, iconography, form behaviour and content structure, and those decisions are cheap at the start and expensive later. Designing both directions together also tends to produce a clearer interface in each.

Modules in this pattern

  • Arabic and English user experience
  • Right-to-left aware design system
  • Responsive web or mobile experience
  • Authentication and profile management
  • Accessible forms and content
  • Notifications
  • Product analytics

Questions to settle early

  • Who owns Arabic content, and what the review process is before publication
  • How numerals, dates and currency are presented in each locale
  • Which directional icons carry meaning and therefore must mirror
  • Whether both locales must always be in step, or one may lead

Usually involves: Digital Product Engineering, Discovery and Architecture

Discuss a problem like this

One component library and content model serve both directions; direction is resolved per request, not per build.

Reference solution pattern

Data and Integration Layer

When several systems must agree, the interface is the product. What distinguishes a durable integration layer is not the happy path but retry safety, visibility when a dependency is down, and a reconciliation the organization can run without help.

Modules in this pattern

  • API gateway or integration services
  • Data mapping
  • Identity integration
  • Events and queues
  • Retry and idempotency controls
  • Monitoring and alerting
  • Reconciliation reporting

Questions to settle early

  • What the system does when a downstream dependency is unavailable
  • Whether a replayed message can create a duplicate effect
  • Who is alerted on failure, and what they are expected to do
  • How the organization proves the two sides agree, on demand

Usually involves: Cloud, Data and Integrations, Discovery and Architecture

Discuss a problem like this

Source systems publish through defined interfaces; a queue absorbs failure; reconciliation proves both sides agree.

Reference solution pattern

Phased System Modernization

A legacy system is usually replaced badly because it is replaced all at once. Staged replacement moves one capability at a time behind a stable interface, with reconciliation at each step and a rollback that has been rehearsed. It takes longer and fails less.

Stages in this pattern

  • Current-state assessment
  • Risk and dependency map
  • Target architecture
  • Staged replacement plan
  • Data migration and reconciliation
  • Controlled launch and rollback
  • Decommissioning and knowledge transfer

Questions to settle early

  • Which capability is safest to move first, and which must move last
  • How long both systems must run in parallel, and what that costs
  • How the two systems are kept reconciled while both are live
  • What triggers a rollback, and who has the authority to call it

Usually involves: Enterprise Systems, Cloud, Data and Integrations

Discuss a problem like this

A routing layer lets capabilities move one at a time, with reconciliation running while both systems are live.

None of these is quite your problem.

That is usually the case. Describe what is actually happening and we will tell you which parts of this are relevant and which are not.