A Fortune 500 consumer technology company whose HR organization supports a workforce spanning six continents, from retail staff to specialized engineering teams. Leadership wanted people analytics at the same rigor they applied to product and supply chain decisions, but the data was fragmented and metrics were defined inconsistently across teams.
People data lived in multiple source systems: HRIS, payroll, recruiting tools, performance management, learning. Each had its own definitions and quirks, and manager in one system didn't always match manager in another. Time-to-fill was calculated three different ways depending on which team you asked. Active headcount on a given Friday could pull a different number from each system. Getting a clear answer to a basic leadership question could take days, and confidence in the answer was capped by the team's confidence that the underlying definitions were sound.
They had the infrastructure for one of the largest private Tableau deployments anywhere, but having the infrastructure wasn't the same as having a system people trusted. Every data pull carried strict privacy requirements that varied by jurisdiction (GDPR, country-specific labor law, internal policy), so quick-and-dirty solutions weren't an option. And the manager population was big enough that any inconsistency multiplied quickly: a definition that drifted between two reports turned into a thousand half-correct status meetings the next month.
A unified semantic layer on top of HRIS, payroll, recruiting, and performance management, with consistent definitions and calculations across every source system. New hire, time to fill, attrition, and active headcount mean the same thing whether you're in finance, HR, or running a regional team. Every metric is tested, version-controlled, and traceable back to source.
Dashboards designed around specific HR workflows: recruiting pipeline health for talent acquisition, workforce planning with attrition-based forecasting for people analytics, executive briefings for HR business partners, manager self-service for line leaders. Role-based access made sure managers saw only their own teams' data, with privacy controls enforced at the data layer rather than the UI.
A custom application with hundreds of prompts tuned to HR data domains. A manager can ask 'what's my team's attrition risk' in plain language and get back an answer with context, historical trend, and contributing factors, all pulling from the same trusted dbt models as the dashboards. The GenAI layer doesn't replace analysts; it lets them work on the questions that actually need them.
The Blueprint ran six weeks: stakeholder interviews across HR, recruiting, performance, and the regional people teams; a full audit of every source system and every metric definition currently in production; a privacy review across the jurisdictions in scope. We came out of Blueprint with about a hundred conflicting metric definitions to resolve and a sequenced roadmap for which dashboards mattered most across the operating cadence.
Through the four-month MVP and the multi-year expansion that followed, we ran weekly working sessions with the people analytics team and monthly steering with HR leadership. Dashboards shipped in cohorts every four weeks rather than waiting for a single big launch. The dbt project ran as a shared codebase from week three onward: their team and ours committing into the same repo, with code review running through their normal engineering process.
Knowledge transfer was the engagement model, not a phase. The people analytics team was co-owner from week one. By the end of the MVP, they were merging the majority of model changes themselves. The expansion phases scaled the team rather than replacing it. When the GenAI layer launched, the prompt library was owned by their analytics team and updated alongside the dbt project, so the conversational layer never drifted from the underlying source of truth.
Our managers can now ask questions in plain English that used to take a week of analyst time. The GenAI layer doesn't replace our analysts. It lets them work on the questions that actually need them.
Thirty minutes with a 829 Analytics partner. You leave with a prioritized view of what to build first, what's worth waiting on, and the business metric anchoring each move. Whether or not we end up working together.