Fragmented reporting
Route, performance and operational figures live in separate inputs and never arrive as one usable view, so every status check is a manual reassembly job.
Approach
The problems that keep coming back.
Across maritime operations and process-heavy businesses, the same three shapes turn up again and again. These are the patterns I build against, and how I work through each one.
Manual bottlenecks
The problem is rarely a lack of data. It is the repeated handling between intake, interpretation and follow-up, done by a person who could be doing something else.
An idea that isn't tangible yet
The concept is real, but there is nothing anyone can touch, so stakeholders cannot engage with it confidently and the decision keeps getting deferred.
Built and running
From pattern to product.
MarOps — shipowner back office
All three patterns, solved in one live system: certificate alerts, evidence-grade GENCON laytime, noon-report reconciliation and voyage P&L for small dry-bulk owners. 187 automated tests, in production.
Passage Plan — bridge decision support
Pattern 01 on the bridge: one GPX route assembled into a single passage-plan draft with VTS areas, reporting points, live NAVTEX, weather, depth and UKC, MARPOL ECA changeovers and a master-approved A.893(21) checklist. A personal tool a chief-mate candidate wrote for his own watches; advisory, not a replacement for the ENC.
Your case
Start a conversation
Recognise one of these?
Describe your version of it and I'll tell you what I would do first.