The work speaks
for itself.

The existing leadership development model was built for a different era: residential, centralized, and capped at roughly 60 participants per year. For a global organization with operations across 19 countries, that math didn't work.

We redesigned the program from the ground up. New delivery model. New curriculum architecture. New technology infrastructure to support synchronous and asynchronous learning across time zones. The result: 376 participants per session across 19 countries — a 6x increase in reach without sacrificing program quality.

Over two years, the program delivered 12,944 training hours across 191 sessions, with participants from 33 countries. NPS scores consistently landed in the mid-80s — 84.4 for Emotional Intelligence, 81.6 for Effective Communication, 80.5 for Development Tools.

The engagement impact was measurable: organizational Learn & Grow scores moved from the 43rd to the 67th percentile. Not from a single program — from building a system that compounds.

Enterprise software solves generic problems. The interesting work happens when the problem is specific to your organization and no vendor has a checkbox for it.

Over 18 months, we designed and deployed six custom applications inside a Fortune 500 manufacturer — each one solving a workflow problem that had been duct-taped together with Excel spreadsheets and tribal knowledge.

The Product Transfer Catalog launched to 500+ users on day one. It replaced a manual process that required people to know who to call, where to look, and which version of which spreadsheet was current. The Early Talent Onboarding Platform streamlined the first 90 days for new hires across manufacturing sites. The Engineering Fundamentals App put technical competency tracking into a single interface instead of scattered across SharePoint folders and email chains.

Each application was built to the same standard: solve the real workflow, deploy it where people already work, and instrument it so you can measure adoption and impact from day one.

Deploying an enterprise learning platform is not a technology project. It's a change management project that happens to involve technology. Most organizations get this backwards, which is why adoption rates are dismal.

We led the enterprise deployment of LinkedIn Learning across a global manufacturer — not just the technical integration, but the communication strategy, manager enablement, and analytics infrastructure to track whether people were actually using it. Within the first cycle: 3,262+ hours of self-directed learning.

Separately, we built a custom Learning Experience Platform (Development Portal) when the existing LMS couldn't support the content architecture we needed. The platform served as the central hub for development programs, competency tracking, and learning pathways — purpose-built for the organization instead of adapted from a vendor template.

We also deployed and administered SkillsBase, a competency management platform connecting skills assessments to development planning across multiple manufacturing disciplines. Not a one-time assessment — an ongoing system that connects individual development to organizational capability gaps.

Most competency frameworks die on the shelf. They're too broad, too abstract, and disconnected from the actual work. The NPI (New Product Introduction) function had accumulated roughly 100 competencies across multiple documents, teams, and initiatives. Nobody could tell you which ones mattered.

We ran the consolidation process: mapping existing competencies to actual job requirements, identifying overlaps and gaps, and working with subject matter experts to distill the list to 5 core competencies that actually predicted performance. Then we built the assessment infrastructure, connected it to development pathways, and operationalized it through SkillsBase.

This wasn't a one-time exercise. We've been designing, deploying, and administering competency and skills frameworks for over a decade — across manufacturing, engineering, quality, and leadership functions. The work includes skills matrices, gap analyses, assessment methodologies, and the technology systems that make them operational rather than aspirational.