Work / Lembra / 2026
Making event suppliers easier to compare.
A supplier’s website rarely tells you everything you need to know. I’m building Lembra to research the options against an event brief, show the sources and make the missing information clear.
01 / The product
More useful than another list of links.
An organiser we spoke to struggled to judge unfamiliar suppliers from their websites and menus alone. Finding businesses was one thing; getting enough information to compare them was another.
In the working product, you describe what you need, compare candidates against that brief and refine the search as your plans change. You can inspect the supporting sources and see which details still need checking.
- Describe the needA brief that can change.
- Compare the optionsFit, sources and information gaps.
- Refine the researchKeep what helps. Change what doesn’t.
Still in testing. The product researches suppliers; it does not confirm availability, obtain a final quote or book on your behalf.
02 / The decision
Planning was only part of the job.
We started by helping fulfil events ourselves and built tools for the jobs that kept repeating. The ambition grew into taking an event from a rough idea through planning, sourcing and coordination.
Talking to organisers made the difficult parts clearer. Quotes changed with staffing, timings and other details a webpage could not settle. People wanted to review anything sent in their name. Building that reliably was a much bigger job than producing a plan.
Plan, source and coordinate an event.
Help someone make a better supplier shortlist.
We narrowed the product to supplier research. It gives us a concrete part of the problem to get right, with a brief the user can revise and evidence they can inspect, before taking on the rest.
03 / Building and testing
Malta. Not Montana.
One search for Malta returned venues in Montana. The location had been shortened to “MT”. The agent rejected the wrong-country results, but the screen then blamed a problem saving them.
Malta → “MT” → Montana
The search and the explanation were both wrong.Use the full country name.
Explain a search failure as a search failure.Working with coding agents, we traced the problem, made the country explicit and corrected the misleading message. Targeted checks reproduced the bug before the fix. A new run in the review build returned and saved suppliers in Malta.
Checked in a review build, 12 September 2026.
What I look for when testing a change
I work through the intended behaviour, inspect the result and use repeatable checks to see whether a fix holds. A passing score is only useful when I can explain what was checked. In this case, that meant checking the country and the message the person using Lembra would actually see.