Finding documented project experience inside your company

From a keyword in a profile to a description of the work done

Say an approved internal project description contains the line: “She ran meetings with stakeholders to gather and confirm requirements”. Another profile says: “Attended a course on running workshops”. Both passages relate to the topic, and only the first describes doing the work the manager is asking about.

A useful search shows the first passage together with the project it concerns and a link to the source. The manager sees why it is worth talking to this person about their part in a similar task. If the course entry also appears, it keeps its meaning as a record of attending training. It does not become proof of running workshops for a client.

After reading the result, the manager confirms the details of the experience with the person and checks availability separately. No matching passage only means the search found no such record in the material it covered. It does not say the employee lacks the skill. The tool is for finding documented work, with no ranking of people and no automatic assignment to a project.

Tidy profiles may already give the answer

Start with how current the profiles are and the names used in the company. If someone ran requirements meetings but the profile only says a general “analysis”, simply making the entry more precise can help the next managers. Shared names and synonyms make search easier without training a separate model.

Ready project management systems also store employees' skills, education, certificates and project experience. Keeping these profiles up to date remains part of the team's work. Before you order a new app, check whether the current fields and search let you find the description you need.

The problem for a model appears when the information exists but is written differently from the manager's question. “Running meetings with stakeholders” may not come up in a search for the exact phrase “requirements workshops”. A search that takes the meaning of the text into account can point to such a passage, while keeping what it really says about the work.

When to adapt the skills search model

First compare ordinary search, agreed synonyms and an available model. If the manager easily finds the right passages, further adaptation may be unnecessary. How useful the result is also depends on being able to open the source. A bare list of names without descriptions leaves the manager with another round of questions for the team.

A trial of adaptation is justified when the model regularly confuses the meaning of descriptions despite a clearly defined task. It may, for example, treat attending training the same as documented running of meetings. People who know the projects then point to the passages that answer the question and explain what sets them apart from entries that look similar.

Google describes tuning selected embedding models to a task or domain on rated examples. These models can be used to search for texts related by meaning. In such a project you assess how relevant the passages found are.

The result can also include a proposal to link a description to the company's name for that type of experience. The person responsible for the profile checks it before saving. If a correction stays only in the manager's one-off summary, the next search may return to the same unclear description. So it is worth combining the review of results with a way to report an addition or a correction to the profile.

Checking on other projects

The manager and a person who knows the documentation review results from projects not used to adapt the model. They check whether the passage found really describes the work in question and whether its link leads to the right source. They record off-target proposals and cases where a known, matching description was not found.

The comparison with the current method should show whether the manager reaches a useful description faster. If they still have to open every profile from the start, a fluent summary changes little.

When what you need is the material for preparing a workshop, the article on an AI knowledge base for professional services firms will help. It describes finding guides and information on how they were used, which the team can draw on while preparing the work.

An experience search that leads to the sources

Syntalith proposes an app for searching documented project experience. The manager describes the task, and the tool finds passages from profiles and approved project descriptions, showing their sources. Reviewing the results also covers reporting corrections, so useful additions reach the records the company maintains.

The client's team names the material meant for such a search, explains the names of types of experience and settles unclear work descriptions. We check what the current profiles and search can do. We compare model adaptation with them where language mistakes keep recurring, and we connect the app to the places where the company updates project information.

Describe one task where a manager had to ask colleagues about earlier experience, even though a suitable record existed. Tell us where it was found in the end. That is enough to start a conversation about the tool you need; information about working together is on Syntalith's pricing page.

What a skills matching model costs and when it pays back

Where to start

In the free process review we choose one process and count the team's volume and working time, and within 2 working days you get a written summary with a price. We build as part of AI apps, and we price maintenance separately.