About Chandler Mahaney

Hotels do not have a data problem. They have a "who is rebuilding the morning report today?" problem.

I'm Chandler. I come from software, not hotel school, which has turned out to be useful for one simple reason: software people are allergic to recurring manual work.

When I started helping hotel teams with "AI," I kept seeing the same less-glamorous problem underneath it. The data existed. The team knew what mattered. But every morning, somebody still had to pull the exports, clean the files, update the sheet, check the exceptions, and send the summary.

That is the work I like fixing.

Book a workflow review Email me LinkedIn

The weird thing I kept noticing.

The first useful answer was rarely "add more AI."

That surprised me a little. I was being brought into conversations that sounded like AI projects. But once we looked closely, the first bottleneck was usually much more ordinary.

Someone was acting as the integration layer. Pulling reports. Cleaning exports. Moving files. Updating tabs. Checking rates. Writing the morning note. Doing just enough manual work that the team could make decisions, then doing it again the next day.

I am not saying that work is easy. I am saying it is exactly the kind of work software should be doing in the background.

If a report matters every morning, it probably should not depend on someone having a perfect morning.

That is the sentence behind most of this business.

The stuff I look for on a workflow review.

The best automation opportunities usually do not introduce themselves as automation opportunities. They look like "how we have always done it."

The daily chore

The report everyone wants, but nobody wants to build.

If one person spends 20 to 45 minutes every morning pulling the same inputs into the same output, that is usually not a people problem. It is a workflow design problem.

The Franken-sheet

The spreadsheet that quietly became infrastructure.

Every company has a few of these. They started as a quick fix, then became the place where revenue, ops, accounting, or ownership actually sees the business.

The fragile handoff

The thing that breaks when one person is out.

If a workflow depends on one person's habits, bookmarks, inbox rules, folder names, and morning routine, it is probably more fragile than the team realizes.

How I usually attack it.

The first project should be narrow enough to be real. One workflow. One useful output. One annoying manual process that stops being manual.

Find the actual mess, not the cleaned-up version.

Which reports exist, where they come from, who pulls them, what gets copied or cleaned, what breaks, and who quietly fixes it before anyone notices.

Use the boring inputs first.

Exports, spreadsheets, scheduled emails, folders, and existing reports are usually enough to start. Direct PMS access is not usually required for the first useful version.

Make the output boringly reliable.

The right win is not a flashy demo. It is an output that shows up on time, in the right format, with the numbers and exceptions the team expects to see.

Then make AI useful, not decorative.

Once the operating view is clean, AI can summarize changes, flag exceptions, and point the team toward the dates, rates, or properties that need attention.

A good first project should feel almost boring by the end. The report arrives. The file is updated. The exceptions are obvious. Nobody had to do the copy-paste ritual. That is the win.

A few things I am not going to pretend.

Not hotel-native

I did not grow up in hotels.

That is part limitation and part advantage. I ask basic questions, notice weird manual steps, and bring the software instinct that repeated work should probably become a system.

Not dashboard-first

I do not care if the answer is a dashboard.

If an automated email, updated spreadsheet, or file in the right folder solves the problem better than a custom app, that is the answer. Adoption beats theater.

Not AI theater

I do not want AI sitting on top of a broken process.

The assembly layer comes first. Once the view is reliable, the interpretation layer has something real to work with.

Show me the report your team is tired of rebuilding.

Tell me what gets pulled, cleaned, copied, checked, or summarized every morning. I will tell you honestly whether it looks like a good fit for a focused automation pilot.

Book a 20-minute review