The AI-native LMS for teams that don't have an L&D department

Why I Built This

Back in 2023, I got frustrated with how corporate learning worked. Every platform felt like it was designed for administrators, not for the person who actually has to sit down and build a course. After more than a decade building VR and education technology, I kept seeing the same problem.

Teams spent 70 to 180+ hours making one hour of finished training material, by outside industry estimates I kept seeing cited (Chapman Alliance's research is the one most people quote). Most of those teams didn't have an instructional designer on staff to begin with, they had one person doing it alongside three other jobs.

In 2024 I founded Konstantly to build something different. Something that felt as natural as sketching on a whiteboard.

The Paradox

I made mistakes along the way. Bet too heavily on tablets. Made the interface too different from what people knew. Used fancy names nobody understood.

But I also listened. Watched how people actually used the platform. And realized something important: everyone wanted two things above all else.

Simplicity and control.

Those two things are usually at odds. Simple tools lack power. Powerful tools are complicated. I spent over a year trying to solve that paradox.

Two Ways to Build, Then One

The visual Pathboard is powerful, but not everyone needs that power. Some people just want a simple, linear course without thinking about branching paths. So I built two modes and let people pick.

That was the mistake. Asking someone to choose an authoring model before they have written a single page is asking them to predict what their course will need, on their first day, with the least information they will ever have. Most people picked wrong, and the ones who picked right had spent thought on a decision that should not have existed.

So it became linear by default. Every course starts as a straight sequence: add pages, lessons, and tests one after another. No canvas, no nodes to connect, no question asked up front.

Branching is something you add later, at the moment a route actually has to depend on something. Then the canvas appears: conditional routing on test results, remediation loops, certification tracks. Here is that logic in motion, an actual course where passing a quiz leads to a certificate and failing routes back to review material first.

Going back is allowed too, but only when nothing would be lost. If a course uses something a straight sequence cannot express, it says which element is in the way rather than quietly dropping it. The rule I settled on: never make someone choose early what you can infer late.

The Editor

The page editor got rewritten from the ground up. Rich text, images, videos, shapes, and diagrams all live on the same surface, dragged and dropped directly on the canvas.

It sounds simple, but getting this right took months. Every interaction had to feel natural. I wanted people to forget they were using software.

Assessments, Reimagined

Creating tests used to be the part everyone dreaded. Hours spent writing questions, configuring settings, managing question banks. The whole assessment experience got rebuilt from scratch.

Six question types: multiple choice, multiple select, true/false, fill-in-the-blank, short answer, and long answer for expert-graded assignments.

But here is where it gets interesting: AI generates your questions. Point the assistant at any lesson, document, or pasted text. It analyzes the content, extracts key concepts, and drafts relevant questions automatically. Control the difficulty level, from recall questions for beginners to application questions for advanced learners. Generate a batch at once, then edit until they're exactly right.

Choosing Who This Is For

For a long time I described Konstantly the way most software gets described: for everyone, for every team, for every use case. It's a natural instinct and it's the wrong one. In mid-2026 I sat down and asked a harder question: who is actually being failed by the rest of the market right now?

The answer was small and mid-size teams, 10 to 150 people, where training is owned by whoever cares most about it rather than a dedicated L&D department. That team doesn't want a demo call before it can see a price. It doesn't want to buy AI generation as a separate metered credit pack on top of a subscription. It wants a real number on the page and a product it can start using the same day.

So that became the actual pricing page, not just a slogan: a free tier that's genuinely free (not a countdown to a sales call), and a published Business price with the per-seat math shown plainly rather than buried behind "contact us."

Alongside that came a harder internal audit: going through every claim on the site and in the blog and asking whether it was actually true of the shipped product, not just true of the pitch. Some of it wasn't, and got fixed. I'd rather publish less and have all of it hold up than publish more and have a prospective customer catch a contradiction I should have caught first.

The Rest of a Real Platform

Beyond creation, everything a team actually needs day to day: Unsplash search and AI image generation built into the editor, clean analytics dashboards for learner activity and completion trends, a full REST API and webhooks on the Business plan, and single sign-on (Google Workspace or LDAP / Active Directory) plus Zapier and Make.com integrations on Enterprise.

What It Means

Most learning platforms treat course creation as a necessary chore. Upload some slides. Add a quiz. Check the compliance box. Move on.

But I have seen what happens when training is done well. People actually learn. They get excited about developing new skills. They come back for more. Good training changes careers. It changes companies.

The problem was never that people didn't care about training. The problem was that creating good training was too hard, and that the tools built to fix that assumed a buyer, budget, and team that most companies don't have.

That is what Konstantly is really about: removing the friction between having an idea and bringing it to life, for the team that has to do it themselves.