About Me
About Me
Embedded Files
I architect learning systems that align mission, people, and performance.
My work bridges operational precision with human‑centered design — creating frameworks that help organizations learn, adapt, and lead.
After serving in the U.S. Air Force, I transitioned into Learning & Development leadership, where I apply systems thinking to build scalable, durable learning architectures. I believe effective learning isn’t built; it’s architected — designed intentionally to serve both mission and people.
The Three Pillars of Learning Architecture
The Three Pillars of Learning Architecture
Mission | People | Performance
Mission | People | Performance
Every learning system I design rests on three structural pillars:
• Mission — clarity of purpose and alignment with organizational goals.
• People — human‑centered design that respects capability and context.
• Performance — systems that translate learning into measurable outcomes.
Together, these pillars form the blueprint for sustainable learning ecosystems — strong enough to support growth, flexible enough to evolve.
Selected Work
Selected Work
My work focuses on architecting learning systems that solve real operational problems. Each project below demonstrates how I align mission, people, and performance to create scalable, durable learning solutions.
Case Study 1 — Strategic Aviation Fleet Modernization
Case Study 1 — Strategic Aviation Fleet Modernization
Architecting a Defensible Training Ecosystem for a High‑Consequence Aviation Enterprise
Architecting a Defensible Training Ecosystem for a High‑Consequence Aviation Enterprise
The Challenge
The Challenge
Training standards had drifted away from operational reality, creating inconsistency, inefficiency, and risk across a large aviation fleet. The organization needed a unified training architecture that could withstand audit, scale across roles, and directly support mission readiness.
My Approach
My Approach
I engineered a complete Operational Training Architecture (OTA) — a blueprint‑driven governance system that standardized functional, departmental, and role‑level task sets. This included a five‑pillar governance roadmap, ISD integration, and a compliance‑ready structure that aligned executive strategy with technician‑level execution.
The Outcome
The Outcome
The organization gained a defensible, auditable, and mission‑aligned training ecosystem. Training hours now translate directly into readiness, and the architecture is scalable across any high‑stakes technical environment.
Operational Training Architecture.pdfCase Study 2 — F‑15 Virtual Reality Training Initiative
Case Study 2 — F‑15 Virtual Reality Training Initiative
Modernizing Aircraft Maintenance Training Through Immersive Technology
Modernizing Aircraft Maintenance Training Through Immersive Technology
The Challenge
The Challenge
Traditional F‑15 maintenance training was time‑intensive, equipment‑dependent, and limited by safety constraints. The organization needed a modern, scalable way to prepare maintainers for new operating concepts.
My Approach
My Approach
I architected a VR‑based training solution that simulated critical maintenance tasks in a safe, repeatable environment. This included designing the learning flow, integrating SME input, and aligning the VR experience with real‑world performance requirements.
The Outcome
The Outcome
The VR program reduced training time, improved safety, and modernized the organization’s approach to technical instruction. It became a model for future immersive learning initiatives.
Case Study 3 — Qualification Program Redesign (51% Reduction)
Case Study 3 — Qualification Program Redesign (51% Reduction)
Re‑Architecting a Qualification System to Improve Readiness
Re‑Architecting a Qualification System to Improve Readiness
The Challenge
The Challenge
A critical qualification program was slow, inconsistent, and misaligned with operational needs. The inefficiency delayed readiness and created bottlenecks across multiple work centers.
My Approach
My Approach
I rebuilt the qualification system using a performance‑aligned architecture: clarified task requirements, standardized evaluation criteria, and redesigned the progression pathway. The new system emphasized clarity, consistency, and mission alignment.
The Outcome
The Outcome
The redesigned program reduced upskilling timelines by 51%, improved instructor consistency, and strengthened the organization’s ability to meet mission demands.
OTA - Workforce Qualification Standards.pdfLet’s Connect
Let’s Connect
I’m always open to meaningful conversations about learning, leadership, and systems design. Whether you’re exploring a project, seeking guidance, or simply want to exchange ideas, feel free to reach out.
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse