About
I value a business, run its operations, and build the layer underneath.
Most people spend a career in one of those. I have needed all three in the same week, and the order they came in is the whole argument for how I work.
Where I sit
Three circles, and the place they overlap.
Finance people rarely run operations. Operators rarely build the software. The engineers who build it have rarely carried a P&L. I have lived in all three, and the value is not any one circle. It is the small space in the middle where they meet. Click a circle.
The overlap
The full-stack operator
The value is not any one circle. It is here, in the overlap, where most people never sit. I can price a decision, make it, and build the system that makes it next time. One person, the whole loop, which is exactly what an operating company needs and rarely finds in one hire.
The reason the other three matter
How the circles got there
The order is the argument.
Nobody plans this path. Mine went finance, then operations, then building, and each one only makes sense because of the one before it.
Learning to value a business
Equity research and client coverage, Nordic investment bank
I started where the whole business is a number: what it is worth, what moves it, and what a decision does to the P&L. Finance taught me to read a business the way you read a financial statement, and to value it from the outside. But a statement tells you where a company stands, not why it stands there. To understand that, I had to go inside it.
"I learned to read a business before I learned to run one."
Learning to run one
Analyst to manager, global life sciences supply chain
I moved to where the number gets made or missed. Inside operations I could finally see it working: the pain and strain people carry, the processes that actually bring the money in, and where people, process, and technology either connect or fall apart. Analysis had shown me the number. Operations showed me what was really behind it, and that is where I started building something around it.
"The number tells you what happened. Being inside the operation tells you why."
Learning to build the layer underneath
On my own time, end to end
So I started building the layer underneath. Streamlining and value stream mapping, not automating waste. Finding the intersections where things actually connect and turning them into something sustainable: an intelligence layer and operational excellence that brings people together rather than cutting them out. Because I run the analytics, I know exactly where it loses time and trust, so I build the fix myself, integrated from the start rather than bolted on.
"Operational excellence is not a slide. It is a layer you build, and I build it."
What that combination builds
Not a job I hold. Things I have stood up.
The point of sitting in the middle of those three circles is that I can own a problem end to end, from what it costs to how it runs to the system that runs it.
The data foundation
One trustworthy source where there were many, plus the production systems on top of it. A real supplier reconciliation now runs daily inside a NASDAQ-listed manufacturer.
Forecasting and planning
Automated replenishment and demand models across ten-plus ERP systemsreportedTen-plus ERP systems that disagreed, consolidated into one reporting framework, with the definitions locked so they stayed that way.Derived from the resume experience bullet's "ten-plus ERP systems" (docs/resume/resume.yaml) and the person.json bio's account of consolidating fragmented manufacturing and supply chain systems into one reporting framework; framed for the Home mockup's proof column per jbroberg-handoff-complete/00-MASTER-HANDOFF.md section 5 ("confirmed facts for the build"), 2026-07-22.Checked 2026-07-22. Inventory policy that tightens itself, and a planning method any site can run.
Data and decision governance
The metric definitions the whole business reports through, standardized and made AI-ready. Governance built into the architecture, not added at review.
A function, from nothing
Walked in as the graduate intern and built the global analytics function that did not exist. It now runs as a team of six, working globallyreportedWalked in as the graduate intern and built the global analytics function that did not exist. Now a team of six, working globally.Confirmed directly by Julia, 2026-07-22 (relayed through the rebuild orchestrator), superseding the 2026-07-18 resume-adjudicated figure of five analysts across four international sites. Also stated in jbroberg-handoff-complete/00-MASTER-HANDOFF.md section 5, "confirmed facts for the build": "Team is six analysts, working globally."Checked 2026-07-22. I do not just lead a team. I multiply one.
Where I am the right person, and where I am not
The honest boundary.
Saying what I do not take on is the cheapest way I know to be trusted with what I do. This is the boundary, stated plainly.
Bring me
- A decision that runs on data your teams argue about
- Fragmented systems that each hold a piece of the truth
- A workflow one person is holding together by hand
- An AI already running that nobody can currently explain
- A function that needs standing up, not just staffing
I will point you elsewhere for
- Anything I would automate before the definitions agree
- A model where being wrong is not measurable
- Work that needs a specialist I would only be pretending to be
- A decision that has already been made and just needs a signature
- Speed with no way to check whether it was right
The record, if you want it
The story is here. The paperwork is one click away.
This page is the why. If you need the full history, the roles, the education, the tools, the dated results, it is all in the CV. But if you are deciding whether to trust me with a build, the work page will tell you more than any resume can.