Competencies are derived from the RACI. Paths are built from the procedures. Videos are produced with Hoctav.
Training is designed alongside documentation, by different people, from different sources. The two end up contradicting each other.
The training material is written once, then ages on its own while the procedure evolves. A year later, people are trained on a practice that no longer applies.
And the simplest question goes unanswered: what does this person, in this role, actually need? Lacking an answer, everyone is trained on everything — which is nobody on anything.
Maestro is under development. This video comes from the MVP — the product running today, not the final platform. As of today, Maestro is used only within Sinfony consulting engagements.
Six functions, as they appear to the people who use them.
Who does what is already established: all that remains is to draw out what each role must be able to do. The framework stops being an invention.
What this role must master, at what level, and what belongs to someone else. Versatility becomes a decision rather than a blur.
Ten percent theory, twenty percent guided practice, seventy percent supervised experience. The proportion is structural, not decorative.
Content classified as explanation during the analysis feeds the theory part directly. Nothing to rewrite.
Maestro designs the path and the script; Hoctav produces the videos and tutorials. Each to its own trade.
What must be validated to be signed off at the workstation is decided at design time, not improvised at check time.
Your matrix exists, maintained by hand in a spreadsheet, and nobody can tie it back to the procedures. Here, it follows from them.
You have neither an instructional designer nor an LMS. The module produces the path; your experts only bring the trade content.
Each module is sold and used on its own. See how this one fits with the other eight.
See the nine modules