Principal Program Manager

Most operations and program management postings read the same: own the roadmap, run the standups, track the Jira tickets, keep the trains on time. That's not this. We're looking for someone who is energized by the parts of the job that don't have a template yet — a dispute nobody's built the case for, a launch with three unresolved dependencies and no clear owner, a reporting structure that's quietly not working and needs to be redesigned rather than patched. This person will spend as much time deciding what the process should be as executing one that already exists. You'll sit at the intersection of engineering, product, finance, and the executive team — translating ambiguity into a plan, and a plan into the two paragraphs an executive will actually read. What You'll Actually DoBuildfrom zero. Take on problems that don't come with an owner, a framework, or a clean data set — and build the structure they need as you go, rather than waiting for someone to hand you a process. Root-cause first. Diagnose before you propose. Segment the data, isolate the actual root cause, and only then bring a recommendation forward — not the other way around. Communicate like it matters. Write and speak in verdicts. Executive updates lead with the conclusion, backed by evidence, with the internal noise filtered out. Create the source of truth. Build the artifact that outlives the conversation — the tracker, the scorecard, the playbook — that becomes the thing the rest of the org points to. Fix root causes, not symptoms. When something breaks the same way twice, propose the structural fix instead of quietly absorbing the workaround a third time. Run in parallel. Hold several unrelated, high-stakes threads at once — a dispute, a launch, an org-design question — without letting any of them drop. Chase the actual blocker. Push work forward by naming the specific blocker and the specific owner, not by reporting a general status. What Makes You Right for ThisYou'recomfortable without a map. You'd rather be handed a messy, undefined problem than a well-documented one. Ambiguity reads to you as room to design, not as a gap someone forgot to fill in. You'rerigorous about what's actually true. You won't put a number in front of a decision-maker unless you've checked it. You know the difference between a confirmed figure and a good guess, and you say which one you're giving someone. You read the room. You know the version of an update that goes to leadership is not the same as the version that goes to the team working the problem — and you don't default to one for both. You'vecreated structure before. You've built something — a system, a process, a proposal — that didn't exist before you built it, and you didn't wait for permission to start. You lead, with or without the title. You can direct other people's work through clarity and follow-through, whether or not they report to you. If this role grows into leading a small team, that's a natural extension of how you already operate — not a new skill you'll need to learn. Youself-correct in public. You're as comfortable being wrong in front of the group as being right — you check your own drafts against the source material and fix them without ego when they've drifted. What This Role Is Not To be direct about fit: this isn't a role for someone who wants a fully scoped process to execute against, a fixed set of KPIs to report on, or a job where the ambiguity gets resolved by someone else before it reaches you. If what draws you to operations work is the order and predictability of a mature, well-oiled process, this will feel like the wrong job. If what draws you in is the chance to build the process, and to be trusted with the parts of the business that don't have one yet, this is built for you.