RMS Ingest Integration Fix

One-Liner

Resolved critical RMS integration failures on at-risk account, reducing duplicate/failed records by ~95% through vendor coordination, retry logic, and payload normalization—protecting go-live timeline and converting account to reference customer.


Full Context

The Situation

Major implementation at risk due to RMS (Records Management System) integration failures. Inbound data feed was producing duplicate records, failed transactions, and data integrity issues. Go-live timeline threatened. Customer losing confidence. Executive visibility on both sides.

Your Role

Technical escalation owner. Diagnosed root causes, coordinated with external vendor and internal API development team, designed fix, validated solution, and managed customer communication throughout.

The Approach

  • Assessed failure patterns: duplicates, rejects, payload errors
  • Diagnosed root causes with internal API team and vendor
    • Missing retry logic causing duplicates on timeout
    • Payload normalization issues causing rejects
    • Alerting gaps masking failures
  • Designed multi-pronged fix:
    • Added retry logic with idempotency keys
    • Implemented payload normalization layer
    • Built alerting for failed transactions
  • Coordinated implementation across vendor and internal teams
  • Validated fix through test cycles
  • Communicated progress to customer executives

The Outcome

Duplicate/failed records reduced by ~95%. Go-live timeline protected. Customer confidence restored. Account became reference customer for similar implementations.


Metrics & Impact

MetricValueContext
Error reduction~95%Duplicates and failures
TimelineProtectedGo-live on schedule
Account outcomeReference customerFrom at-risk
Resolution time~6 weeksEnd-to-end

Technical Resolution

IssueRoot CauseFix
Duplicate recordsMissing retry logicIdempotency keys
Failed transactionsPayload formatNormalization layer
Silent failuresNo alertingTransaction monitoring

Skills Demonstrated

Primary Skills

Secondary Skills


Resume Usage

Appears in: 1/25 variants (OpenGov PM)

Bullet Point Versions

Technical audience (detailed):

Resolved critical RMS integration failures by coordinating with vendor and internal API team—added retry logic with idempotency, implemented payload normalization, built alerting—reducing errors ~95% and protecting go-live timeline.

General audience (accessible):

Led resolution of critical integration issue threatening major implementation, coordinating technical teams to reduce errors by 95% and deliver on schedule.

Leadership focus (strategic):

Converted at-risk account to reference customer by leading cross-vendor technical resolution that protected timeline and restored customer confidence.

Abbreviated (space-constrained):

Resolved critical RMS integration issue; 95% error reduction; protected timeline.


Transferable Themes

  • Problem-solving under ambiguity
  • Cross-functional collaboration
  • Technical execution
  • Leadership / influence without authority
  • Process improvement
  • Innovation / creative solution
  • Crisis management
  • Data-driven decision making
  • Stakeholder management
  • Scaling / growth
  • Cost reduction
  • Revenue generation

Best theme for this project: Crisis management and technical problem-solving


Interview Preparation

STAR Format

Situation: Major implementation at risk due to RMS integration failures. Duplicate records, failed transactions, data integrity issues. Customer losing confidence. Executive attention on both sides. Go-live timeline threatened.

Task: Diagnose root causes, coordinate fix across vendor and internal teams, protect timeline, and restore customer confidence.

Action:

  • Analyzed failure patterns to identify root causes
  • Coordinated with external vendor and internal API development team
  • Designed three-part fix: retry logic, payload normalization, alerting
  • Managed implementation across multiple teams with different priorities
  • Ran validation cycles before declaring fix complete
  • Maintained regular executive updates with customer leadership

Result: Errors reduced ~95%. Go-live delivered on schedule. Customer confidence restored. Account converted to reference customer.

Likely Follow-up Questions

  1. “How did you diagnose the root causes?”
  2. “How did you coordinate between vendor and internal teams?”
  3. “What was your communication approach with the customer?”
  4. “What would have happened if you hadn’t resolved this?”

Potential Challenges/Objections

ConcernResponse
”This sounds like a developer task”Coordinated the solution—not writing code, but diagnosing issues, designing fix approach, managing vendor, and driving accountability.
”How do you measure 95% reduction?”Compared error logs before and after fix. Tracked duplicate records, failed transactions, and alert triggers.

Parent organization: Tyler Technologies Similar projects:

This project led to:

  • Reference customer relationship
  • Improved integration monitoring practices

Reflection

What went well:

  • Systematic diagnosis before jumping to solutions
  • Cross-vendor coordination despite competing priorities
  • Transparent communication maintained trust

What you’d do differently:

  • Earlier integration testing would have caught issues sooner
  • Better pre-go-live monitoring requirements

Unexpected lessons:

  • Integration issues are rarely one root cause
  • Vendor coordination requires persistent follow-up
  • Customers appreciate transparency during problems

Main pages:

  • what-ive-done — Demonstrates technical troubleshooting and crisis management capabilities
  • my-superpowers — Primary evidence for API & integrations expertise and escalation management

Target roles:

Related: See Executive Escalation Resolution Program, SSO First-Time-Right Initiative