← Selected work

Venture · Compliance systems

GreenStruct.

The task is only done when the proof holds up.

My role
Founder
My contribution
I mapped a proposed compliance workflow and the steps towards certification, then discussed the idea with people in the industry.
Current status
Pilot discussions

The key ideaAn uploaded photo is evidence to review, not a completed task.

The handoff I’m exploring

A requirement can get lost between the checklist and the site.

I started with the handoff between understanding a requirement and getting it done on site. GreenStruct brings those steps into one record: what is required, who owns the action, what evidence is needed, and who reviews it.

GREENSTRUCT / FOLLOW ONE TASKInteractive example

Connect the issue
to its proof.

Choose a site issue, then follow its record.

SITE NOTE / 001Work open

Secure the storage cover.

Location
Material storage area
Owner
Site supervisor
Due
Before inspection
EVIDENCEA dated photo showing the full cover and every corner.

The evidence request stays attached to this task.

WHY THIS STATUS
Someone owns the next step.

The supervisor has a specific task, a location, and a deadline. The record stays open until the work is checked.

Fictional walkthrough of the proposed workflow. The photo and review are simulated; no site evidence is attached.

What matters in the record

The status needs a reason.

Show the unfinished work

I chose to show the tasks and their evidence. A single score would make it harder to see what still needs attention.

Make the status easy to check

Someone reviewing a status should be able to open the requirement and see the evidence behind it.

Next step · Pilot discussions

Now it needs a site team.

GreenStruct reached discussions about a pilot and was selected for Microsoft for Startups Founders Hub. I don’t yet have results from a live site.

Three things a pilot needs to tell me

  1. Can someone turn a requirement into a clear, assigned task?
  2. Can the team keep the evidence up to date during normal site work?
  3. Can a reviewer understand the status without chasing missing context?