Scores a candidate against a role and shows the gap, so applications go where they have a real chance, not everywhere at once.
KeevaathTech/Products/Gulf Careers Academy
Product · Live since December 2025
Gulf Careers Academy
A career platform for professionals pursuing employment across the Gulf, including a contract analyzer that flags exploitative terms because the market has a documented problem.
What it does
A career platform for professionals pursuing employment across the Gulf Cooperation Council. It covers the stretch of a job search that generic job boards leave out: understanding which roles are realistically open to you, presenting your experience in the format regional employers expect, and preparing for interviews that carry regional cultural expectations.
It also includes a contract analyzer that flags exploitative terms such as passport confiscation, wage irregularities and illegal recruitment fees. That feature exists because the migrant labor market in the region has a documented problem, and a job platform that ignores it is doing half the work.
What is in it
Match scoring
Interview simulation
Practice interviews carrying the cultural expectations of the region, not a generic question bank.
Contract analyzer
Reads an employment contract and flags exploitative terms, ranked by severity with the clause cited.
Readiness assessment
What is missing before an application is worth sending, and what to do about each gap.
Labor law library
Per market, so a candidate can check a term against the law that governs it.
Six GCC markets
Each with its own visa mechanics, hiring norms and documentation requirements, and the platform holds all of them.
The hard problem
The platform went live at the end of December with eighty eight backend functions, twenty nine pages and eight languages including Arabic and Urdu. Two testers took the assignment seriously and filed structured observations against the live site, and their reports disagreed with our fix reports. Repeatedly.
The instinct in that situation is to defend the work or redo it. Both are wrong. What we did eventually was download the contents of the production bucket, unzip it, and read the deployed files line by line against every claim in the most recent fix report. That afternoon reorganized the entire backlog, because three completely different problems had been sitting in one pile wearing the same face.
One group was fixed in code and invisible in the browser, because the delivery layer was still serving the previous version of the file. The fix was real. The tester was also right. One group had been recorded as fixed and never written, which is what happens when a long session ends and a summary gets composed from intent and not from evidence. And one group could not be fixed by the approach in use at all: a usage limit documented as a browser storage fix, on a page that no longer used browser storage for limits. The tester had already told us, by reporting that the problem followed them into a different browser. State that follows you across browsers lives on a server. We had the answer in the bug report and read past it.
The rest were the same shape. A language switcher that correctly flipped the page to right to left while leaving every word in English, because the translation applier wrote text content into elements whose translations contained markup. Arabic that survived every local test and arrived at the bucket as garbled characters, because the upload path corrupted the encoding. Each took minutes to repair and days to see.
What it cost, and what changed
Six and a half weeks separated launch from the audit. Inside that span the fix report reached its eighteenth revision, and the testers filed a third round of observations against items that had already been closed once. About three working days of engineering went into re-treating defects that were already correct in the deployed code, and that is the smaller half of the bill. The larger half was calendar, because every cycle waited on a tester to come back before anyone learned anything new.
What changed at the front of every build since is that the verification path is defined before the first deployment goes out. Nothing closes on the strength of a fix report, closure requires evidence pulled from the deployed system itself, and cache invalidation is written into the deployment step instead of remembered after somebody complains.
Status
Live since December 2025. Funded, designed and operated by the studio.
Questions we are asked
Is this available to employers as well as candidates?
The platform is built candidate first. Employer side conversations happen through the studio, and pilots are the usual starting point.
Which markets does it cover?
Six GCC markets: the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, Oman and Bahrain. Each carries its own visa mechanics, hiring norms and documentation requirements.
Can the contract analyzer be licensed on its own?
It is the component most often asked about, and yes, that is a conversation worth having. Pilots, licensing and distribution all start the same way.
Who operates it?
KeevaathTech, meaning the team that built it. When a deploy breaks something at two in the morning, it is our phone.
Pilot trials, partnerships, licensing or distribution.
Tell us which and we will come to the first conversation prepared. You will usually hear back within five working days, from the person who would run it.