Program Lead, Human & Agent Experience

We need to output HTML fragment with sections: About the role, Responsibilities (What You'll Do), Requirements (Required Qualifications), Preferred Qualifications maybe as separate? The instruction: Use

for section headings (e.g. About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule). We should include sections only if posting has real specific content. We have About the role (the paragraph after "About the Role:"), Responsibilities (What You'll Do list), Requirements (Required Qualifications), Preferred Qualifications (maybe as "Preferred Qualifications" but not in list; could be "Qualifications" but we already have Required Qualifications; we could combine? Better to have "Requirements" for required, and maybe "Preferred Qualifications" as separate heading if content exists. The instruction list includes Qualifications as possible heading; we can use "Qualifications" for required and maybe "Preferred Qualifications" as separate? But they said use headings like About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule. So we could have "Requirements" for required qualifications, and maybe "Preferred Qualifications" not in list; but we could still include if we want but they said prefer few substantive sections over many thin ones. Could combine required and preferred under "Qualifications" with subheadings? But they want only those headings. Probably we should have sections: About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Benefits, Pay. Also maybe "Qualifications" but we already have Requirements. Let's decide: Use "About the role", "Responsibilities", "Requirements", "Benefits", "Pay". Also maybe "Preferred Qualifications" could be under Requirements as a subsection but not a separate heading; but we could still include as part of Requirements paragraph. We must not repeat job title. No Job ID. Remove boilerplate like EEO etc. Also remove application instructions, etc. We need to preserve all substantive information. So we need to include the description about SecurityScorecard (the "About SecurityScorecard:" paragraph) maybe as part of About the role? Actually "About SecurityScorecard:" is company overview; could be placed under "About the role"? The instruction says use

for section headings (e.g. About the role, Responsibilities...). The "About SecurityScorecard:" is not exactly "About the role". But we could treat it as part of "About the role" or maybe we need a separate section like "About the company"? Not in list. Probably we should include it under "About the role" as introductory paragraph. The instruction: "Do NOT repeat the job title as a heading (the page already shows it) and do NOT put Job ID / requisition numbers as headings — fold minor metadata into a short

or drop it." So we can include company overview as a paragraph under About the role. Thus structure:

About the role

SecurityScorecard is the global leader ... (the whole About SecurityScorecard paragraph) plus the role description paragraph after "About the Role:"? Actually the role description is after "About the Role:" heading. We need to include that content. So we can combine both paragraphs under About the role. Then

Responsibilities

• each bullet from "What You'll Do" list. Then

  Requirements

  • each bullet from "Required Qualifications". Also maybe include "Preferred Qualifications" as part of Requirements? Could add a note but better to include as separate

    Preferred Qualifications

    but not in list. However instruction says "Use

    for section headings (e.g. About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule)." It doesn't forbid other headings, but they gave examples. Safer to stick to those. Could treat "Preferred Qualifications" as part of "Requirements" with a note like "Preferred: ..." but we need to preserve all substantive info; we can include them as list items under Requirements with a label? Might be okay. Then

    Benefits

    Specific to each country, we offer a competitive salary, stock options, Health benefits, and unlimited PTO, parental leave, tuition reimbursements, and much more!

    Then

    Pay

    The estimated total compensation range for this position is $185,000 - $230,000 (base plus bonus). Actual compensation for the position is based on a variety of factors, including, but not limited to affordability, skills, qualifications and experience, and may vary from the range. In addition to base salary, employees may also be eligible for annual performance-based incentive compensation awards and equity, among other company benefits.

    We should not include Schedule as not present. We must output only HTML fragment, no markdown fences. Let's extract the About SecurityScorecard paragraph exactly: "SecurityScorecard is the global leader in cybersecurity ratings, with over 12 million companies continuously rated, operating in 64 countries. Founded in 2013 by security and risk experts Dr. Alex Yampolskiy and Sam Kassoumeh and funded by world-class investors, SecurityScorecard’s patented rating technology is used by over 25,000 organizations for self-monitoring, third-party risk management, board reporting, and cyber insurance underwriting; making all organizations more resilient by allowing them to easily find and fix cybersecurity risks across their digital footprint. Headquartered in New York City, our culture has been recognized by Inc Magazine as a "Best Workplace,” by Crain’s NY as a "Best Places to Work in NYC," and as one of the 10 hottest SaaS startups in New York for two years in a row. Most recently, SecurityScorecard was named to Fast Company’s annual list of the World’s Most Innovative Companies for 2023 and to the Achievers 50 Most Engaged Workplaces in 2023 award recognizing “forward-thinking employers for their unwavering commitment to employee engagement.” SecurityScorecard is proud to be funded by world-class investors including Silver Lake Waterman, Moody’s, Sequoia Capital, GV and Riverwood Capital." Now the role description after "About the Role:": "SecurityScorecard's Product & Design org is rebuilding itself around AI-first workflows, where designers prototype directly against the live codebase with Claude and hand off working interactions instead of static Figma comps, and where AI agents increasingly operate alongside human users inside our product. We need an operator to build and run the systems that make both sides of that work: the human design org, and the emerging discipline of agent experience (AX). This is a design/UX operations and program management role, not a design-execution role. You won't be shipping mockups. You'll be building the operating model, cadence, metrics, and standards that let a pod-based, AI-first org move fast and stay aligned, on the human experience side and on the agent experience side alike." We can combine these two paragraphs under About the role. Now Responsibilities list: each bullet from "What You'll Do". Let's extract: - Design and run the operating model for a pod-based design org: designers embedded in cross-functional product pods, owning continuity per product area, no central ticket queue. - Drive adoption of AI-first design practices: designers prototyping from the live codebase and design system with Claude (or equivalent), shipping working interaction detail instead of static comps. - Own design-to-engineering handoff so interaction details, the details that get lost between Figma and code, are captured, accurate, and buildable on arrival. - Own agent experience (AX) operations: coordinate the evals, guardrails, and agent primitives (permissions, tool access, escalation paths, failure handling) that let agents operate reliably and safely across the product. - Define how humans and agents hand off to each other, and how multiple agents coordinate with each other, so collaboration is designed on purpose rather than emerging by accident. - Define and track the metrics that prove the org is moving faster and improving the overall experience: prototyping velocity, handoff quality, cycle time, agent eval coverage, and AI-tooling adoption on both the human and agent sides. - Run planning, prioritization, and cross-pod cadence, including shared or infrastructure-level design work that spans product lines. - Support customer co-build and live-prototyping sessions, making sure what's learned scales across similar customers instead of staying one-off. - Partner with the UX Director and pod leads to onboard designers into the AI-first workflow and raise the bar on tooling fluency, design judgment, and agentic design skill. - Operate as connective tissue across a flat org, no management layer between designers and the Director, coordinating standards rather than managing headcount. Now Required Qualifications bullets: - 5+ years in design/UX operations, program management, or a similar operating role, ideally in B2B SaaS (B2C patterns don't transfer well here). - Direct experience running AI-enabled design workflows: designers working from a live codebase and design system, producing interactive prototypes, and handing off implementation-ready specs to engineering. - A real point of view on AI-first design-to-engineering workflows, formed by doing it, not just using an AI tool. You can speak to tooling, process, and the tradeoffs you've hit. - Some direct exposure to agent evaluation, guardrails, or agent-facing product design, whether that's building evals, defining agent permission/escalation models, or designing how a product surfaces to an AI agent versus a human. - A track record of replacing centralized, ticket-based intake with embedded, pod-based ownership, or a clear, credible plan for how you'd do it. - Comfort operating without a rigid management hierarchy, driving standards across teams you don't manage. - Strong cross-functional operating skill: you can run planning and prioritization cadences across design, product, engineering, and security without becoming another approval layer. - A bias toward rapid, disposable prototyping over precious, over-invested design work. Preferred Qualifications bullets: - Background in cybersecurity, threat intelligence, or another security-adjacent B2B SaaS product. - Experience standing up or scaling an AI-first product development practice at a company going through the same transition (e.g., rolling out agentic coding or design tools org-wide). - Experience running customer co-build or live-prototyping sessions with enterprise customers. - Experience building or operating multi-agent systems, or defining eval frameworks for agent behavior in production. We could include these under Requirements as well, maybe as a separate subsection but we can just add them as list items under Requirements with a note "Preferred:"? But that would mix required and preferred. Better to have a separate section "Preferred Qualifications" but not in the given list. However the instruction says "Use

    for section headings (e.g. About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule)." It doesn't forbid other headings, but they gave examples. To be safe, we could incorporate preferred qualifications into a "Qualifications" section, splitting required and preferred with subheadings? But they said use

    for section headings; we could have

    Qualifications

    and then inside have two
    lists with headings? But we cannot use headings inside? Could use

    Required:

    etc. But that may be okay. Simplify: Use

    Requirements

    and include both required and preferred as list items, maybe differentiate with a note. But risk of losing nuance. However the instruction says preserve ALL substantive information; we can still preserve by including them as list items, but we lose the distinction between required and preferred. That might be considered losing substantive info (the distinction). Better to keep distinction. We could have

    Required Qualifications

    and

    Preferred Qualifications

    . Even though not in the example list, it's still a heading. The instruction didn't forbid other headings; it just gave examples. It said "Use <