Skip to content
WP
← Selected work

Case Study 02 · Work completed at Alpaca Systems

Turning paper inspections into a shared digital workflow

An end-to-end platform for dynamic forms, approvals, documents, and concurrent shop-floor work under practical infrastructure constraints.

Outcome

Moved inspection work from paper toward a shared tablet-based workflow with clearer approvals, documents, and handoffs.

ReactJavaScriptNode.jsSQL databaseSSE

Role and context

What I owned

Formal title
Junior Web Developer, later Web Developer
Project responsibility
Primary engineer with end-to-end responsibility for the application.
Team context
Worked directly with stakeholders and coordinated with adjacent application, infrastructure, and delivery contributors.
Personally owned
Workflow modeling, application architecture, dynamic forms, approvals, authentication, document generation, import, integration flows, and most implementation.
Collaborator ownership
Stakeholders defined operational needs; adjacent teams supported infrastructure, related systems, and deployment concerns.

The operational problem

Software had to match the way the work moved.

Paper-based inspection handoffs made traceability difficult and slowed collaboration across engineering, assembly, quality, and shipping.

Constraints that mattered

  • The project had limited senior engineering mentorship when ownership transferred.
  • Manufacturing users needed tablet-friendly flows that matched real handoffs rather than generic form software.
  • The infrastructure constraint ruled out WebSockets for concurrent updates.
  • Legacy reports had to remain useful during incremental adoption.
01

Engineering

02

Assembly

03

Quality

04

Shipping

REST

Durable edits

SSE

Report-scoped updates

Conceptual visual using invented data. No proprietary artifacts are shown.

Diagnosis

Find the system behind the symptom.

  1. 01

    Mapped the inspection lifecycle and the ownership changes between operational roles.

  2. 02

    Separated template definition, report execution, approvals, and document output into distinct concerns.

  3. 03

    Identified concurrent editing as an awareness problem as well as a transport problem.

Decision log

The choices and their costs.

01

Model the workflow, not just the form

Built dynamic templates together with status transitions, role-aware actions, approvals, and notifications.

Trade-off

A richer domain model required more up-front design than a simple form database, but matched the real operation.

02

Split writes from live updates

Used REST for durable edits and Server-Sent Events with report-scoped rooms for server-to-client awareness.

Trade-off

SSE is one-directional, so the design relied on clear write endpoints rather than a single bidirectional channel.

03

Support gradual migration

Added document import and JSON-to-PDF generation so existing reports could enter and leave the new workflow.

Trade-off

Legacy document variability required defensive parsing and explicit limits instead of pretending every file was uniform.

What changed

Result and evidence

  • Inspection activity gained a shared digital record across multiple operational roles.
  • Tablet-based work reduced reliance on paper handoffs and improved visibility into status.
  • The application could connect with related process systems and support incremental migration.

Evidence quality

The operational outcome is qualitative. No public percentage is used because a preserved measurement record is not available.

Reflection

What I would improve today

I would now formalize the domain language sooner, add stronger automated contract and workflow tests, and document the collaboration protocol as an architecture decision before implementation expanded.

This Case Study is a sanitized account of work completed at Alpaca Systems. Product and client names are withheld. Visuals are original conceptual explanations using invented data; no former-employer screenshots, source code, schemas, or proprietary diagrams are shown.