Angelo CalabròDeveloper, media buyer, builder

I speak both languages: code and marketing.

I study how a business actually works, find the problem worth solving, and build what fixes it: software, automation, AI. From diagnosis to shipped product.

scroll

You explained it perfectly. They built something else.

Every company I've walked into has the same graveyard: a dashboard nobody opens, an automation that broke after one update, a six-month software project that solved the wrong problem. And somewhere, one spreadsheet quietly holding the whole operation together.

The usual explanation is bad developers or vague briefs. I think it's simpler than that.

Inside most companies, two groups speak two different languages. The business side lives the problem every day, but can't build the answer. The tech side can build almost anything, but has never lived the problem. And most developers don't even try to: they take the request, write the code, ship what they were told to ship. Nobody stops and says “wait, this would work better another way”, because you only see the better way if you've felt the problem.

The company is sure it explained the problem. The tech team is sure it understood. Then the delivery comes, and it's something else entirely: not what was meant, and not what was needed.

I've spent my career on both sides of that wall. I've lived the business problem, and I've designed and shipped the software that fixed it. So whether I build the thing myself or lead the team that does, nothing gets lost between the person who understands the problem and the person who delivers the answer.

That's what speaking both languages means.

Developer first. Then the ads got me.

I started as a developer with a company of my own. We built software for other businesses, plus a few small products of ours.

Then that company was acquired by a performance marketing agency, and I landed in a world that was the opposite of code: messy, fast, brutally honest.

The market tells you instantly if you're wrong. I loved it.

I've always had a simple belief about work: machines should do the mechanical part, and people should do the part that actually needs a person. The agency was the perfect place to test it. Lead generation at scale, and almost everything done by hand: smart people spending entire days copying data between platforms, launching campaigns one by one, checking accounts one by one.

So we automated everything that didn't need a brain. Campaign creation in bulk, account monitoring, reporting. Work that took eight hours started taking four, and the other four went into strategy and creative, where people actually make a difference. Fewer people could manage more budget, volumes scaled, and when the agency was eventually sold, the technology we had built was part of what made it worth buying.

That became the pattern of my career. Since then I've done the same for other companies, inside marketing and outside it: study how the work actually gets done, find the manual, repetitive, error-prone part, and turn it into software that just runs.

And everything I've just described happened before AI. The line back then was clear: machines did the mechanical work, and people kept everything that needed a brain.

AI moved that line. Today even part of the brain work can be automated, which frees people for the work that's actually meaningful to the business. Every company talks about AI. Very few know where to put it, because using it well takes two things at once: knowing your processes and knowing the machines. Both languages, again.

What I actually do

a.

Finding the real problem

I don't start from a brief. I start from how your team actually works: where the hours go, what gets done twice, what lives in a spreadsheet because no tool ever fit. The most useful thing I do is often pointing at a different problem than the one I was called for.

b.

Building the fix: software, automation, AI

Custom software and automations that take the mechanical work off your team's hands. AI systems with guardrails and one clear job, applied where they save hours, not where they look good in a slide. Built to run every day, not to demo once.

c.

Product thinking, hands on or leading a team

I can see a product before it exists: the features, the interface, how it should feel to use. Then I can build it myself, or direct the team that does. Either way, one person owns the whole thing, from whiteboard to shipped and maintained.

If any of this sounds like a problem you're staring at

I'm based in Italy and I work with companies everywhere. If your team is buried in work a machine should be doing, or you can see the product but not the way to build it, my inbox is open.