I don't teach programming. I teach your people to build the automations they redo by hand today.
I train people who are not programmers: floor staff, kitchen staff, back-office staff, department staff. They don't leave having learned a language — they leave able to look at a procedure they repeat every day, understand where every figure is born, and build it so it runs on its own on the tools they already have.
On the course you learn it. On the Services page I do the work. Here your own people learn to do it — and that only makes sense if the work is going to come back: in different departments, in different properties, on reports that resemble each other.
Go to the Services page→I train on-site at your premises, or remotely on Google Meet, Microsoft Teams and GoToMeeting. Based in Bolzano.
A funded course that changes nothing is something we all recognise.
You have someone in-house with a name, who already does that procedure by hand and has time of their own to take it on. And you have more than one process that resembles it — in different departments, or in different properties.
You have one single routine to sort out and nobody who wants to learn it. In that case you don't need a course: you need somebody to do it.
Then go to the Services page→Four things, and none of them is a programming language.
Recognising the right process
01Not every repetitive task deserves to be automated. You learn to pick the one that pays back: how many times a day it happens, what an error costs, how stable the procedure is. It's the part that carries the value, and the only one you won't find in a tutorial.
Reconstructing the manual method
02Before writing anything, you write down how you do it today: where every figure is born, who touches it, what happens when it's missing. Skip this step and you automate a mistake.
Testing on copies
03Live data is not touched until the results match the manual method. You learn to build the dirty scenarios yourself — missing data, typos, different ordering — and to demand zero differences before going into production.
Leaving something that can be corrected without you
04An automation that needs an IT person at every change is a failed automation. You learn to design the day-to-day corrections as plain text files, and to keep a person approving every draft wherever there is artificial intelligence.
From a blank page, or from a system that already runs.
From a blank page, on your own process
You take one task your office redoes every day and bring it to run on its own, together, starting from nothing. It's the slower route, and it's the one that stays: whoever has done it once knows how to do it again on the next process.
- ›The process is chosen together before anything begins
- ›The manual method gets written down before a single thing is automated
- ›Slower — and the route that leaves the most behind
From a system that already runs
You start from a real automation, in production: a flow that every morning at 07:00 gets the right messages to the right people, without anyone writing them. You take it apart — why that calculation, why that check, why that draft to approve — and then rebuild the same pattern on your own process.
- ›The worked example is a system in production, not a demo
- ›You take it apart before rebuilding it: the calculation, the checks, the draft to approve
- ›You get operational sooner, because you don't start from a blank page
No new subscription starts: as in the consulting work, what gets built stays yours, with the accounts in your name. What changes hands is the pattern, not a product.
What I need from your side.
Four conditions, and I say them up front. If one of them is missing the work doesn't start — and I'm the one who says so.
- +One person, not a list of attendees — the one who knows the process, not the one with the emptiest calendar.
- +A real routine, chosen before we start: the one somebody redoes every single day.
- +One real month of files, on copies. Nothing is learned on invented data, and live data is not touched.
- +Protected time: if during the training sessions that person stays on call for the floor, it doesn't work — and I say so before, not after.
Corporate trainer since 2019. What I teach, I did by hand first.
- +Smart-DDT® Method — proprietary system for automatic purchase-cost extraction
- +Business process automation for invoice / DDT reconciliation
- +Revenue Management, Hotel Business Intelligence and Controlling
- +Prompt engineering, AI workflows and predictive forecasting models
- +Reorganisation and supervision of hotel departments
No certificate, no accreditation. What stays behind is an automation of yours that runs, and the person who knows how to rebuild it on the next process.
The questions that decide it.
Is this a programming course?
No. The part that counts is deciding what to automate and how to verify it, not the language it is written in. Anyone looking for a course in a language will find better elsewhere.
How long does it take?
I don't publish a number of sessions, because it depends on the procedure you bring: a recurring send and an invoice reconciliation are not taught in the same span. In the 30-minute call we look at your routine and I tell you what it needs — before you block anybody's calendar.
Do you issue a certificate? Can we use a training fund?
I work as an independent trainer, not as an accredited training body: I issue no certificates. If the path has to go through a fund, we check the formal side together with your own adviser before we start, not after. I say it at the beginning precisely because it's the first thing they'll ask you.
Do we have to buy anything?
No, as in the consulting work: we work on what you already have.
Do we need an IT person in the company?
No. You need one person who knows that procedure by heart because they do it every day. The rest is learned.
And if the person we train leaves?
That's exactly why everything gets written down: the manual method first, the corrections as plain text files afterwards. An automation that lives only in one person's head is a risk, not a result.
What's the difference with the Services page?
There, I do the work on your tools and hand it over running. Here, your own person builds it and I work alongside them. If you want the result without training anyone, go there instead: it's a legitimate choice and it costs you less internal time.
The funding comes after the right question.
The right question is a different one: in six months, will you still be doing that procedure by hand? If the answer is yes, the course was useless — funded or not. Once that is settled, the training path can often be financed: we look at it together, case by case, to see whether your business qualifies.
Bring me a routineand the person who knows it.
In 30 minutes we look at the procedure and at the person who should learn it: I tell you whether teaching it is worth it, what the path needs, and if it isn't worth it I tell you that too.