ASHBY • SR. PRODUCT MARKETING MANAGER, ENTERPRISE

Enterprise Product Marketing

One set of verified facts. Different decisions. Consistent enablement.

I translate complex evidence for different decision-makers and build practical training systems that help people use the message independently.

3 institutions

one controlled evidence base

40% / 33%

faster qualification in two separate programs

80 hrs / 200

first-ever predeployment curriculum / Airmen

View evidence

CONTEXT

My bridge to this role is not prior SaaS product-marketing tenure. It is 19 years of Air Force training, technical communication, and multi-organization work plus founder-led Moonroot work where I adapted one acquisition case for different institutions, built the analysis behind property decisions, and created controls that kept audience-specific documents tied to the same facts.

CASE 01

Same facts, different decision-makers

Problem: A metrics-heavy lender proposal put detailed numbers before the first reader had a clear reason to care.

Approach: Re-architected the material into a short mission/alignment document plus detailed operating and financial validation, both tied to the same evidence. Later, adapted the same acquisition evidence for three institutional audiences with different emphasis, requested decision, risk framing, and security terms.

Result / learning: The first change was a design decision rather than measured audience reception. The later work produced three audience-specific decision packages without changing the underlying facts.

CASE 02

From stalled to qualified

Problem: A qualification program had stalled.

Approach: Invested 400 hours and 86 practical exercises into rebuilding the program around hands-on qualification work.

Outcome: Upgrade-training time fell 40%, and six NCOs earned team-leader certifications.

What it shows: Enablement can be practical, repeatable, and measured by whether people reach the required capability faster.

CASE 03

One property decision, in the weeds

Problem: Listing and desk assumptions about a prospective property did not survive direct field observation.

What changed: A site walk changed the understanding of water, timber, topography, and best use.

Action: Rebuilt valuation and offer thresholds, defined walk-away conditions, and created a cross-domain due-diligence queue from the field evidence.

Outcome / learning: The decision moved from a listing narrative to explicit thresholds and open diligence questions before proceeding.

CASE 04

When the source of truth failed

Problem: An AI-assisted proposal was contaminated by the wrong historical source after a file-ID failure.

Action: Caught the regression, deprecated the bad version, restored the correct base, and added source-identity checks, completion-state validation, correction records, and stop-and-verify rules.

Outcome / learning: The failure became a concrete test of the source-control system instead of a one-off copy edit.

Supporting evidence

Separate qualification program — five Airmen, 220 tasks, 45 practical operations, and a 60-day / 33% faster certification cycle.
U.S.–Republic of Korea Air Force EOD work — first-ever bilateral exercise, nine engagements, 16 training events, and bilateral instruction plus five practical exercises for 61 allied personnel.
Awards-program writing — drafted packages and chaired boards; team members earned five Achievement Medals, three Commendation Medals, two Must Promote ratings, one Promote Now rating, and two Below-the-Zone selections.
Intelligence-to-training translation — 64 intelligence reports converted into 57 realistic training devices and 24 operations for 34 personnel.
Cross-organizational standards — 13 tested UXO mitigation methods synchronized across five Major Commands and three Department of Defense services.
Stakeholder research — presented proposed uses to a conservation easement holder, invited correction, and received preliminary, conditional written feedback.
Separate acquisition decision support — built offer strategy from market signal, valuation bands, comparable sales, buyer-pool constraints, landing-zone scenarios, and a walk-away ceiling.
Equipment purchase analysis — compared configurations, utilization, build-vs-rent choices, terrain constraints, and phased triggers; later evidence removed unnecessary equipment from the plan.

How I would approach Enterprise product marketing at Ashby

Start by learning the existing Enterprise framework in the field: read lost-deal notes, ride along on Enterprise calls with Sales and Solutions Engineering, and note where the current message holds up or breaks down.
Map the buying committee by decision: what Finance, Legal, Analysts, Heads of Talent, Recruiting Operations, and other stakeholders need to believe, verify, approve, or defend internally.
Extend the existing Enterprise messaging framework from one set of verified facts, keeping the company narrative, Enterprise story, audience-specific proof, and claim boundaries consistent.
Build enablement with the other sales-supporting teams: practice-based training, role-plays or practical exercises, and a simple check that a rep can adapt the message without the trainer present.
Support TCO and ROI content with transparent assumptions, sensitivity, and proof rather than a single unqualified number.
For ABM and Analyst Relations work, learn the existing programs first; contribute the Enterprise message and evidence without claiming program ownership.
Feed recurring objections, deal friction, proof gaps, and competitive alternatives back into the verified facts and messaging framework.

Scope & boundaries

I have not worked in a SaaS product-marketing or sales organization, and I have not owned ABM, Analyst Relations, or HR-tech programs. The Moonroot lender packages and financial models described here are decision materials and analysis, not financing secured, software-deal outcomes, or realized ROI.

Continue the conversation: Email Devin • LinkedIn