FUTUREKIND · SOFTWARE STUDIO
I turn expert workflows into working software.
I build and run software for jobs where the details matter: controls preconstruction, document-heavy operations and local-first tools.
The work starts with the operator, the actual files and the decisions the software needs to handle.
Real work. Real consequences.
Software built around the job.
Real projects arrive as drawings, quotes, spreadsheets, design files and decisions. I build software that can work with those inputs.
The goal is practical: fewer repeated steps, clearer exceptions, faster review and an output the next person can use.
- 1.Find the leverage.
Map the workflow, the evidence, the expensive mistakes, the bottlenecks, and the decisions that actually require judgment.
Find the repeated manual steps and the decisions that slow the job down.
- 2.Build the system.
Connect the files, interfaces and systems already used by the team. Automate the operations that can be repeated and checked.
- 3.Make it hold up.
Real use exposes what the demo could not.
Permissions. Evaluation. Source evidence. Regression checks. Human approval. Failure handling.
When something breaks, the correction should become part of the system so the same lesson does not have to be learned twice.
Software built for real work.
Lighting controls, from sold quote to submittal.
The preconstruction workflow I run on real commercial jobs: project preparation, quote and BOM reconciliation, drawing checks, and one clear handoff for the estimator.
The software stages the correct files, prepares documentation and surfaces discrepancies. The controls designer handles the final design and release decisions.
For controls teams
For quotations teams, controls designers and contractors preparing lighting-controls bids, shop drawings and submittals.
What the team gets
Fewer repeated file operations. Source-backed drawing and BOM discrepancies. One ordered handoff for the work that still needs the controls designer in the design software.
See it work
See the existing review and submittal workflow. Then scope the part of production your team wants handled.
See the controls workflowBuilt for the work after the first run.
Real projects change. Drawings get revised, scope shifts and a review can uncover something the original inputs missed.
The software keeps the source evidence, makes exceptions visible and gives the operator a way to review, correct and continue.
Production work shapes the next release.
Each recurring issue becomes a test, a better check or a change to the workflow.
That is how the controls tools, Stem and the other products improve: the next release addresses something observed in actual use.
What to bring me.
A workflow that costs too much
Important work still depends on repetitive reading, document handling, handoffs, or expert judgment. I can map the workflow and find the smallest change that produces real leverage.
An AI prototype that breaks in real use
The demo works. The gap is reliability, workflow fit, verification, human control, or turning the prototype into an actual product.
A team moving from AI experiments to operation
Models and prototypes already exist. The next questions are what becomes shared infrastructure, what gets measured, what needs a gate, and what the organization should keep from every failure.
Have a workflow that should work differently?
Send me the problem, where the work gets stuck, and what happens when it goes wrong.
The lab.
I also build products and experiments outside client work.
Perihelion (opens in a new tab) · HoldSpeak · Reviewer (opens in a new tab)