ENGAGEMENT · MODE 01 · TRAINING
Make your engineers ten times more productive.
Most engineering teams have access to Claude Code, Cursor, and the same AI tools I use. Few of them ship at the speed I do. The gap is not talent: it is workflow discipline, prompt instincts, and a refusal to accept the old implementation tempo. I work directly with your team to close that gap.
The shape most relationships start with. Install the workflow. Compound from there.
Book a call◆ Who this is for
Engineering teams of 5 to 50 where senior leadership has noticed that AI tools are being used unevenly. CTOs and VPs of engineering who want this to become an organisational capability, not a personal one.
- ◆Your team has Claude Code or Cursor licenses but you cannot tell if they are paying off
- ◆You have watched one engineer ship in a day what others take a week to ship
- ◆You are hiring AI engineers and getting outbid; meanwhile your existing team could be the answer
- ◆You want AI literacy to be a baseline expectation, not a niche skill
◆ Where this sits in the relationship
This is usually how a relationship starts. The team is talented; the AI posture is not. A focused training engagement is low-risk for both sides and gives us real working knowledge of each other. If it works — and it usually does — the next shape tends to surface within a quarter. A pipeline that needs building. An architecture decision that needs ownership. The first engagement becomes the foundation for what comes next.
◆ What we'd do
The engagement starts with diagnosis. I spend time with your engineers: pair sessions, code reviews, tool audits. I observe how they actually work and where the leverage is missing. Most of what I find is invisible to leadership: engineers prompt-engineering inside chat windows when they should be in Claude Code, building from scratch when they should be delegating, treating AI as autocomplete when it should be a peer.
From there we install the workflow. This is hands-on. I run focused workshops on session structure, design-first discipline, test-first as quality gate, multi-agent decomposition, and where these tools break. Each engineer leaves with a workflow they can actually use, not a deck they will forget.
Then the follow-through. The first 90 days after a workshop are when habits either stick or do not. I stay engaged through async reviews, weekly check-ins, and unblocking specific problems your engineers hit. The output difference is measurable by week six.
◆ What you get
Diagnostic report
A clear-eyed assessment of your team's current AI tooling posture, where the gaps are, and what to fix first.
Tailored workshop curriculum
Built around your stack, your product, and the specific patterns your team has missed.
Live workshops
Hands-on sessions with your engineers, remote or on-site. Not lecture. Pair work.
Documented workflows
Everything your team learns is codified. They own the workflows after I leave.
90-day follow-through
Async reviews, weekly check-ins, unblocking. Habits stick because I stay until they do.
◆ What this is not
This is not a generic AI for developers course. It is not a slide deck. It is not a webinar series. It is not a one-day session that disappears. If you want training as theatre, plenty of firms will sell you that. This is workflow installation, and it only works if your team actually does the work.
◆ Relevant work
The same workflow that built TraceLayer in 21 days is the workflow your team will be running.
Read the case studyLet's talk about this.