Challenge:
The ELA platform sat at the intersection of three groups that didn't naturally speak the same language: the federal client (FEMA), Corpay business stakeholders, and cross-functional IT groups including infrastructure, security, and DBA teams. Requirements arrived in business terms, infrastructure changes arrived in ticket-speak, and the development team needed both translated into actionable engineering work without losing fidelity. Misalignment on a federal contract — a misread requirement, a missed compliance constraint, a surprise infrastructure dependency — would have meant rework, blown milestones, or worse. Someone had to own the translation layer so the team could ship.
Solution:
Served as the primary liaison between Corpay business stakeholders, FEMA-facing contacts, and cross-functional IT groups for the full ELA engagement. Coordinated meetings, gathered requirements, surfaced technical constraints early, and translated between business language and engineering language in both directions. Made sure the development team had clear, unambiguous work to do and made sure stakeholders had honest, accurate status — including when something was at risk.
Impact:
Kept the engagement aligned across three groups that had different vocabularies, different incentives, and different definitions of "done." The development team got clear, unambiguous work because requirements were translated and validated before they hit the backlog. Stakeholders got honest status, including when something was at risk, which built trust faster than optimistic reporting would have. Cross-functional dependencies (infrastructure, DBA, security) were surfaced early enough to schedule around rather than absorb as surprises. The documentation trail — meeting scripts, ADRs, Jira tickets — gave the engagement a defensible record on a federal contract where audit-readiness matters.
Sign in to add comments