One learner, and the two people watching.

A learner should never have to work out what to do next. They are invited, they open one programme, they see the next lesson and how much is left, they start, and they know what comes after. Everything else — the structure, the rules, the reporting — sits underneath and stays out of their way.

One learning record is read by three people. The learner sees what to do next and how much is left. Their trainer sees who needs help and whose work is waiting. The administrator sees enrolment, access and whether the organisation can show the training happened. Each view is designed for the job it does.

Which role sees what is agreed per project. This is one plausible shape, not the shape you will get — and separating trainer from administrator is usually the decision that matters most.

Assessment can take several shapes: questions marked automatically where the answer is objective, submitted work a trainer reads and returns, an acknowledgement where somebody simply has to confirm they have read something, and a trainer sign-off where competence is judged rather than scored. Which shapes a programme uses is decided per programme.

Not every programme needs every kind, and a platform that forces one shape onto all of them is the reason people end up assessing by email.

Enrolment decides who gets access to which programme and when. People can be added by role, imported in bulk, invited individually or enrolled automatically when something changes in a connected system. Cohorts group people who move through a programme together, so dates, trainers and reporting all have something to attach to.

What happens when somebody moves cohort, changes role or leaves is decided with you. Those rules are unglamorous and they are what keeps the platform honest a year in.

Existing content, learners and completion history can usually be migrated, but what actually moves depends on what the current platform can export. We check that first — with a real export, not a feature list — then map what exists to the new structure, load a sample, verify it against the old system and only then move the rest.

We check what your current platform can export before defining the migration. Some platforms release everything, some release users and courses but not detailed progress, and a few release very little — that answer changes the plan, so we get it early.

A learning platform can connect to the systems you already run. An HRMS can create learners and cohorts automatically from joiners and roles. A CRM or customer portal can enrol customers and partners. Single sign-on removes a separate password. Notifications go through your existing email. Each connection is defined around what the other system can genuinely expose.

We confirm what each existing tool can expose before defining the connection. Where a system cannot provide something, we say so before it is scoped in rather than after.

An off-the-shelf LMS is the right answer when a standard course structure works, standard roles are enough, the integrations you need already exist and a per-learner subscription is acceptable. A custom platform earns its cost when the learning flow is unusual, roles and access are specific to you, several different audiences share one platform, it has to connect properly to systems you already run, or the experience has to be yours rather than a vendor’s.

If a subscription fits, we will tell you that. A short conversation about how you actually train is usually enough to know which side of this you are on.

The size of an LMS project is decided mainly by how many audiences and roles it serves, how complicated the content structure and enrolment rules are, what kinds of assessment are needed, how much existing content and history has to migrate, how many systems it connects to, and how much administration has to be built for the people running it.

What is a custom LMS?

A learning platform built around how your organisation actually trains, rather than configured from a template. The structure of programmes and courses, who can see what, how people are enrolled, what counts as complete and what the trainer and administrator screens do are all decided with you. The content, the learner data and the platform are yours.

Who actually needs a custom LMS?

Organisations whose training does not fit a standard shape: several audiences on one platform, access rules specific to their business, assessment that needs real trainer review, or a genuine need to connect learning to the systems they already run. If none of that describes you, a subscription is very likely the better answer.

How is this different from subscribing to an off-the-shelf LMS?

A subscription gives you a working platform quickly, on somebody else’s structure and at a price per learner. A custom build fits your training, your roles and your systems, and you own it — but it takes longer and costs more up front. Off-the-shelf is the right answer for many organisations and we will say so rather than sell around it.

Can it train employees, customers and partners on one platform?

Yes, and that is one of the more common reasons to build rather than subscribe. They share the platform but not the experience: different eligibility, different content, different access, and usually different sign-in. A partner manager seeing only their own organisation’s people is the kind of rule that is awkward to buy and straightforward to build.

How do cohorts and enrolment work?

People can be enrolled by role or team, imported in bulk, invited individually, enrolled from a connected system, or allowed to self-enrol from what they are eligible for. Cohorts group people who move through a programme together, which gives dates, trainers and reporting something to attach to. What happens when somebody changes cohort, role or leaves is decided with you.

Can trainers review and mark learner work?

Yes, and it is worth building properly. Submitted work arrives in a trainer queue rather than an inbox, the trainer records an outcome and comments, and both go back to the learner attached to the work they are about. Completion can be held until that review happens, so a programme is not marked done before anybody has looked.

What kinds of assessment can courses have?

Questions marked automatically where the answer is objective, submitted work a trainer reads, an acknowledgement where somebody confirms they have read something, and trainer sign-off where competence is observed rather than answered. Which of those a programme uses is decided per programme — most do not need all four.

Can content have prerequisites and release rules?

Yes. What unlocks what is a rule on the structure rather than something somebody remembers to do. Content can also open from a date, be due by a date, or stay open for as long as somebody is in a cohort. Where a due date matters it is enforced rather than suggested.

Can completion records and certificates be supported?

Yes, where you need them. Completion is recorded with a date against a named programme version, which is what anybody auditing you tends to ask for, and it can be exported. Certificates can be generated where that is part of how you work. What a certificate has to show is a scoping question, not a template choice.

Can different roles see different things?

That separation is most of the value. Learner, trainer and administrator are three different jobs, and the trainer/administrator split is usually the one that matters most — a trainer needs their own cohort, an administrator needs enrolment and access across everybody. Additional roles like a partner manager or a regional lead are common.

Can our existing courses and content move across?

Usually. Videos, documents, slides and written material can be brought in and restructured. Packaged material such as SCORM or xAPI is confirmed against your actual files first, because what a platform calls a standard export and what it produces are not always the same thing. Anything that turns out not to move is identified during the audit rather than discovered later.

Can existing learners and completion history move?

It depends on what your current platform will export, which is why we check that before defining the migration. Some release everything, some release users and courses but not detailed progress, and a few release very little. We take a real sample export early, because that answer changes the plan.

What content types can a lesson be made of?

Video hosted or embedded from where it already lives, documents and slides you already have, written lessons authored in the platform, questions and quizzes, and assignments a trainer reads. Live sessions can be linked with attendance recorded where that is scoped. We confirm formats against your material rather than listing everything.

Does it work on mobile, and do we need an app?

The learner experience is designed mobile-first in the browser, which is where a lot of learning actually happens — on a phone, between other things. There is nothing to install and no app store review to wait on. If the project genuinely needs a native app or app-store distribution, that is scoped separately rather than assumed.

Can it connect to our HRMS?

Where the HRMS allows it, and this is the connection most organisations want first. A new joiner can become a learner in induction without anybody retyping them, roles can drive eligibility, and completion can be visible against the employee record. What is possible depends on what your HRMS can expose, which we confirm during scoping.

Can it connect to a CRM or customer portal?

Yes, where it helps. Customers and partners can be enrolled from a CRM, and training can live inside a portal they already sign into rather than behind a second login. Customer training in particular usually belongs where the customer already is.

Can single sign-on be added?

Yes, where you already have a directory to sign in against. It removes a separate password, which matters more than it sounds — a training platform people cannot get into is a training platform nobody uses. It is scoped against your specific identity provider rather than assumed.

How are reminders and notifications handled?

Through your own email, from your own domain: invitations, reminders before something is due, and alerts to trainers when work is waiting. Reminders are what makes a due date real, so this is rarely something to leave until later.

Who owns the platform, the content and the learner data?

You do. The code written for you, the training content and the learner records are yours, handed over as agreed in scope, and exportable. There is no Branditify LMS product, no per-learner price and no version to license — this is a system we build for you, not a platform you rent from us.

How is security and compliance handled?

Security and compliance requirements are scoped per project. Where a specific standard or certification applies to your organisation or your sector, we confirm what it requires and design the scope around it rather than claiming it is already covered.

What determines the scope of an LMS project?

Mainly how many audiences and roles it serves, how complicated the content structure and enrolment rules are, what kinds of assessment are needed, how much existing content and history has to migrate, how many systems it connects to, and how much administration has to be built for the people running it day to day.

What affects how long it takes?

The same drivers, with two that move it most: migration, because it depends on what your current platform will release, and integrations, because they depend on systems we do not control. Both are scoped before committing to dates rather than after, which is why we ask for a sample export early.

What happens after we get in touch?

We ask who learns, what they need to complete, who reviews it and what content and tools you already have. That conversation usually settles whether you need a custom platform at all. If you do, it produces a scoped first version aimed at one audience and one real programme rather than everything at once.