Clouddev · Kyoto operations

Build AWS architectures reviewers can follow

  • Mentor markup on diagrams, IaC diffs, and risk memos—not generic scorecards.
  • Programs tuned for JP procurement rhythms, bilingual office hours, and realistic JPY cost drills.
  • Certificates document participation; outcomes stay owned by your managers.

Browse programs Request information

Field note

Cohort anchors rotate between Osaka logistics APIs, Kyoto SaaS shops, and remote teams across APAC—same syllabus, different war stories.

Warm overhead desk scene with notebooks and markers

Signals we track internally

Quiet proof beats loud promises

11
years publishing cohort syllabi
186
mentor code reviews last quarter
38
partner orgs rotating guest critics
9.1 / 10
post-session surveys (internal)
612
documented lab hours in library

Inclusions

What a Clouddev seat actually buys

Facilitated sessions, accountable mentors, and templates you can paste into internal wikis. We bias toward narrative artifacts—decision logs, threat notes, FinOps memos—because those survive longer than slide decks.

Corporate bundles add facilitator onboarding calls and optional Japanese-language summaries for executives who will not join labs.

01 — Process

Three beats before the first AWS console opens

  1. Anchor story — you document the workload narrative your reviewers will expect.
  2. Evidence plan — you choose which diagrams, diffs, and budgets must exist by week two.
  3. Mentor handshake — we align on tone: blunt, kind, never anonymous drive-by comments.
  4. Lab cadence — short bursts with checkpoints, not marathon midnight hacks.
  5. Closing brief — you ship a one-page handoff your manager can defend without you in the room.
Printed architecture diagram with pencil annotations

Programs on the calendar

Four seats teams asked us to spotlight

Full catalog

From our cohorts

Experience notes, not miracle claims

The VPC endpoint finance lab in the Regional Services studio gave our CFO a vocabulary for PrivateLink without me re-drawing the diagram nightly.

IAM Guardrails rehearsal caught our break-glass logging gap before auditors arrived—blunt mentor markup helped.

Client in fintech — the Terraform review rubric is taped above my monitor. Still disagree with one scoring weight, but at least we argue about the same chart.

FinOps clinic sensitivity tables made reserved capacity conversations shorter, not sweeter, which was honestly what we needed.

Close-up of hands annotating sticky notes on glass

Collaboration marks

Teams that lent guest critics recently

Eastbridge Systems
Kitakagu API Co-op
Minato Data Guild
Shirasagi Mobility Lab
Harborline Payments Pilot
Tanba Manufacturing Cloud

Straight answers

Four questions finance and security ask first

Do you guarantee cloud savings?

No. We teach measurement and facilitation patterns; your workloads dictate invoices.

Will you access production?

Only under explicit contracts. Public cohorts stay in sandboxes or repositories you supply.

Is certification included?

Exam vouchers are separate SKUs. We focus on studio practice, not cram schools.

Can managers audit progress?

Yes—weekly artifact summaries exist for corporate seats, not for individual privacy-sensitive tracks.

Keep the thread

Download the architecture intake brief

A four-page PDF describing evidence we request before matching mentors. No payment wall—just an honest scope check.

Request the PDF Compare seat bundles

Stack of paper briefs tied with twine on desk