I help people escape operational chaos so they can focus on what matters.
Most organizations don't have a strategy problem - they have an execution problem, and it usually lives in the space between leadership and the technical team. I've spent over a decade operating in that space: managing stakeholders, sequencing priorities, and building the bridges that turn a roadmap into a shipped product or a vision into a running business. From real-time grid operations at MISO serving 45 million people to standing up a startup's entire operating infrastructure, I bring the clarity and follow-through that close the gap between what's planned and what gets done.
I'm an operations and product leader with over a decade of experience scaling startups and building products within large enterprises. I move fluently between waterfall and agile, and I'm equally comfortable as an individual contributor or a strategic leader — brought in to create order from complexity, whatever the company's size, industry, or stage.
Currently I am the COO at MPOWER Grid Edge, an early-stage energy startup building the standard for independent risk ratings of generation and storage assets. Before that, I led the real time monitoring product at MISO, a $447M regional transmission organization, that operators relied on to manage grid reliability for over 45 million people. Earlier in my career I helped scale 3BG Supply Co., an industrial supply & distribution company, where I led the implementation of agile frameworks, tools, and systems.
Traveling, experiencing new cultures, and seeing the world through different lenses is what shapes how I think and how I lead. The same curiosity that drives me to explore new places also drives me to find better ways to grow businesses and solve real customer pain.
I bring the company's vision to life. I translate big ideas into an executable plans, then run the day to day across sales, marketing, operations, and finance so those functions work seamlessly together. I hold the leadership team accountable, solve the cross-functional issues, and own goal completion for the company.
I bring structure to product ambiguity and build teams around execution. I also lead project efforts, focused on results and outcomes instead of just milestones for milestones' sake.
I identify where a business is losing time, money, and morale, and implement scalable processes that both employees and AI can adopt to meet the company's goals.
Whether you're adopting agile for the first time or untangling a broken implementation, I can help bring organization and structure to how teams execute.
I own the planning lifecycle, turning priorities into clear plans with defined timelines and owners. As an example, I've implemented EOS (the Entrepreneurial Operating System), which reinforces a company-wide operating rhythm and keeps cross-functional work moving on schedule.
I work across the platforms companies already own rather than pushing a preferred stack. These are the ones I use most.
Don't see a tool you use listed here? I ramp quickly on new platforms and enjoy adding to my toolkit.
Logos are property of their respective owners. Their use here reflects tools I have experience with and does not imply affiliation with or endorsement by these companies.
•{{ bullet }}
A set of examples that demonstrate my range. Select any project to read the full case study.
{{ p.description }}
{{ activeProject.detail }}
The company was operating across ten disjointed tools with no real connection between them. Sales tracking was inconsistent, information was not easily obtainable or reportable, and getting a straight answer usually meant pulling separate reports from separate systems and merging them together by hand.
Maintaining that many systems grew expensive from both a technology and a cost perspective, technical debt kept increasing, and we had no unified view of the business, which left us unable to understand what was actually happening across the company without a significant manual effort.
I put together the business requirements documentation and established a clear picture of the current state, then built a fit and gap analysis to determine where NetSuite would cover our needs out of the box and where it would fall short. I brought that analysis to the rest of the leadership team along with my recommendations, and we aligned on a future state solution that we moved forward to implement.
During the implementation I led the team responsible for both the technical and the non-technical, financial components of the ERP, and I also owned the sales team's transition documentation and training.
The result was a unified system of record where sales, finance, operations, and HR could coexist and see the current state of the business almost immediately. Reporting consolidated into a single system, and the sales pipeline became clear enough that the finance team could project future cash flows and position the business for more favorable financing.
The consolidation gave us room to build more comprehensive plans for the future state and to optimize the sales team through automation and process improvement, and it standardized the product catalog, which let the product pipeline grow considerably as we established more comprehensive pricing updates and automations to stay competitive in the marketplace.
Data arrived late and the display never said so. A value on screen might be four seconds old or four minutes old, and the interface rendered both the same way. So operators learned to treat every reading as a maybe. That distrust is rational and it is corrosive. It turns a monitoring screen into one more thing that has to be verified.
Context lived elsewhere. Understanding whether a reading mattered meant opening another window to see what the resource was supposed to be doing, then a third for recent history. A single judgment call cost three screens and the working memory to hold them together.
Operators were also experiencing alarm fatigue. They had built a habit of validating alarms by hand before acting on them, which cost time, trust, and introduced more cognitive load. In addition, operators did not have the right alarms at the right time, which added even more work to their already busy lives.
The underlying issue was that the display made operators do the interpretation. Most of the information was present, just not easily understandable for a human to establish situational awareness.
I spent time with operators using the screen during real system conditions, not in a conference room describing it afterward. The most useful thing I learned was not on my list of questions; operators had developed personal workarounds, gap tools (excel sheets, call lists, and manual ancillary tools), and those workarounds were costing time in a big way.
From there I anchored the redesign to ISA-101, the published standard for high performance HMI. Anchoring to a public standard did two things: 1) It gave every design decision a defensible rationale that survived stakeholder review, and 2) it allowed me to achieve faster buy-in from engineers instead of debating aesthetics.
Roughly 90 percent of the display stays neutral so that color, when it appears, draws the right attention at the right time. Every card shows information intentionally, what the value should be, and where it has been, so operators can easily compare and gain situational awareness. Missing or stale telemetry is treated as a condition an operator needs to know about rather than an absence of information, displayed as its own state instead of hidden behind a value that looks live. Each alert shows what triggered it, how long the condition has persisted, and the quality of the underlying telemetry. Alerts also had to persist through a debounce window before escalating, which removed a large share of the noise that had trained operators to distrust the system.
Time to comprehend system state dropped substantially. The relevant measure is not how fast the screen renders but how quickly a human can tell whether anything needs attention. Cognitive load fell during high-activity periods and operators escalated issues less often because the evidence they needed to justify acting was easily accessible.
Two operators looking at the same condition could now reach the same conclusion. After implementation, less seasoned operators were able to make most of the same calls more tenured operators were making, not from experience, but from the right information at the right time.
The company experienced fewer missed conditions because abnormal states were visible and audible, rather than embedded in a table. There was also a dramatic reduction in false-positive investigations, because the debounce rule and the evidence display let operators dismiss noise without leaving the screen.
The industry is losing experienced operators to retirement faster than it can replace them, and the knowledge that leaves is exactly the kind that lets someone look at a dense table and know which row matters. The new display made conditions understandable and lowered the experience threshold required to operate the system safely.
Designs shown are illustrative reconstructions built for this portfolio using synthetic data. They are not the delivered product. Impact statements are deliberately directional.
Move the software team to a product operating model, using Mik Kersten's Project to Product and the Flow Framework as the map. Stand up a durable product team, make the value stream visible and measured, and give the organization a vision and roadmap it could see itself in.
Illustrative data. It shows the shape of the change, not real figures.
How the team's capacity split across features, defects, risk, and debt each quarter. Early on, two thirds went to defects and debt. By the end, most of it went to delivering value.
Releases shipped per quarter. This is the result the operating-model change actually drove.
Items completed per sprint. I track this as a health signal, not a target. It rose as flow load and firefighting dropped.
Illustrative prototype. Numbers and flow data are mock examples used to show the shape of the work, not the company's real figures or confidential detail. Reference: Mik Kersten, Project to Product (Flow Framework).
A P&L tells a broad story about the business. A scorecard gives you a much more in depth look at where you're heading and helps identify potential issues before they become problematic. We picked a small set of leading indicators, gave each one a target and a single owner, and reviewed them at the top of every weekly leadership meeting. When a number went red two weeks running, it became a discussion item that week instead of a surprise at quarter close.
| MEASURABLE | OWNER | TARGET | W1 | W2 | W3 | W4 | W5 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| {{ row.metric }} | {{ row.owner }} | {{ row.target }} |
A trend going the wrong way showed up in week two rather than at the end of the quarter, while there was still time to act on it.
Conversations shifted from competing opinions about how things were going to a shared view of what was actually happening.
Every measurable had a single owner, so no number sat in the gap between two departments.
This is not an org chart. It maps the functions the business actually needs and puts one name against each. Building it is where the uncomfortable conversations happen, because it exposes the work two people both think they own and the work nobody does.
Two leadership roles sit at the top. Below them the business breaks into its major functions, each with a small set of distinct accountabilities and one person answerable for them.
The annual session sets direction for the year. The quarterly session narrows that direction to high-priority "rocks" the company will actually finish in ninety days, covering things like fundraising, company acquisition planning, product development goals, and sales enablement. The weekly meeting keeps the rocks moving and on track. Everything else waits its turn, which is both the hardest and most valuable part.
Two days with the leadership team to agree on where the company is going and what the year has to deliver.
Review the last ninety days honestly, then commit to the priorities that matter most for the next ninety, each with an owner.
Same agenda, same time, every week. Scorecard first, then priorities, then the issues blocking them.
There was no single metric that captured it. What changed was that everyone was on the same page and rowing in the same direction, and that showed up in every meeting that followed.