Senior Product Manager - Feature Flagging

We need to output HTML fragment with sections: headings

for sections like About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule. Only include sections that have real specific content. We need to extract content from posting. Let's parse: - About the role: The first paragraph(s) describing mission, role description. Could be "About the role" heading. - Responsibilities: The "What you will Do:" bullet list. - Requirements/Qualifications/Skills: The "Who you are:" list. - Benefits: The "Benefits & Growth:" section includes benefits details. - Pay: The salary range: "$192,000—$240,000 USD". Also mention competitive salary and equity package, variable compensation. So we have pay info. - Schedule: The role based in NYC, works from office 3 days a week. That's schedule info. We must not repeat job title as heading. No Job ID. We must not include boilerplate like EEO, legal, etc. We must preserve all substantive info, not invent. We need to use

• for any list of duties/requirements/benefits, and

  for prose. We need to decide which sections to include. We have: - About the role: prose. - Responsibilities: list. - Who you are: could be Requirements/Qualifications/Skills. Could combine into one section "Requirements" or "Qualifications". The instruction says use headings like About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule. We can choose which are appropriate. We have content that covers requirements (experience, technical understanding, communication, B2B, AI-fluent, location). Also skills maybe overlapping. We could make a single "Requirements" section with list. We also have "Benefits & Growth": list of benefits. Pay: salary range. Schedule: office 3 days a week. We must not create sections with filler like "commensurate with experience". We have actual content. Now produce HTML. Structure:

  About the role

  ... prose ...

  Responsibilities

  • ...
  ...

  Requirements

  • ...
  ...

  Benefits

  • ...
  ...

  Pay

  The reasonably estimated yearly salary for this role at Datadog is: $192,000—$240,000 USD. Datadog offers a competitive salary and equity package, and may include variable compensation.

  Schedule

  This role is based in New York City and works from our office 3 days a week.

  We need to ensure we preserve all substantive info from the posting. Let's extract About the role prose: "At Datadog, we're on a mission to build the best platform in the world for engineers to understand and scale their systems, applications, and teams. We operate at high scale, enabling seamless collaboration and problem-solving among Dev, Ops, and Security teams globally for tens of thousands of companies. Our engineering culture values pragmatism, honesty, and simplicity to solve hard problems the right way. Feature flags used to be simple on/off switches. That's changing fast. Flags are becoming a control plane: they're tied to observability, they drive rollout decisions, and AI agents build and run more of this work every day. Datadog is building the platform for that future, and we are now expanding our Feature Flagging & Experimentation product to pair flag decisions directly with observability signals and to modernize the flagging workflow for an SDLC increasingly run by agents. As a Senior Product Manager for Feature Flagging, you will own product strategy and drive execution across flags-plus-observability integration and agentic-era flagging workflows. You will set direction for a critical area of the roadmap, work closely with the observability, RUM, and APM teams, and report directly to the Director of Product leading this team. You'll be relied on to make sound, independent product judgment calls with limited oversight, bring engineering credibility to every decision, and drive B2B go-to-market strategy alongside sales. At Datadog, we place value in our office culture - the relationships and collaboration it builds and the creativity it brings to the table. This role is based in New York City and works from our office 3 days a week to support that collaboration." Note: The last sentence about NYC and 3 days a week is also schedule; we might duplicate. But we can keep in About the role? Might be redundant. Better to keep schedule separate and maybe remove duplicate from About the role. However we must preserve all substantive info; we can keep it in both places? The instruction: preserve ALL substantive information; do NOT invent or summarize away detail. It doesn't forbid duplication, but better to avoid redundancy. We could keep the schedule info only in Schedule section and remove from About the role. But then we lose that sentence from About the role. However the About the role paragraph originally includes that sentence; if we remove it, we are summarizing away detail? It's a detail about location and schedule. Since we have a dedicated Schedule section, we could keep it there and not repeat. The instruction says preserve ALL substantive information; not necessarily that each piece must appear exactly once, but we should not lose any. If we move it to Schedule section, it's still preserved. So we can omit from About the role. Thus About the role prose will be everything except the final sentence about NYC and 3 days a week. Let's craft About the role paragraph: "At Datadog, we're on a mission to build the best platform in the world for engineers to understand and scale their systems, applications, and teams. We operate at high scale, enabling seamless collaboration and problem-solving among Dev, Ops, and Security teams globally for tens of thousands of companies. Our engineering culture values pragmatism, honesty, and simplicity to solve hard problems the right way. Feature flags used to be simple on/off switches. That's changing fast. Flags are becoming a control plane: they're tied to observability, they drive rollout decisions, and AI agents build and run more of this work every day. Datadog is building the platform for that future, and we are now expanding our Feature Flagging & Experimentation product to pair flag decisions directly with observability signals and to modernize the flagging workflow for an SDLC increasingly run by agents. As a Senior Product Manager for Feature Flagging, you will own product strategy and drive execution across flags-plus-observability integration and agentic-era flagging workflows. You will set direction for a critical area of the roadmap, work closely with the observability, RUM, and APM teams, and report directly to the Director of Product leading this team. You'll be relied on to make sound, independent product judgment calls with limited oversight, bring engineering credibility to every decision, and drive B2B go-to-market strategy alongside sales. At Datadog, we place value in our office culture - the relationships and collaboration it builds and the creativity it brings to the table." Now Responsibilities: The "What you will Do:" list. Let's extract each bullet: - Find every place where a flag decision and an observability signal should talk to each other - rollout gating, anomaly-triggered rollback, experiment diagnostics - and ship a roadmap that unlocks observability and experimentation differentiators in Datadog Feature Flags - Work closely with the observability, RUM, and APM teams to make flags a real signal across the platform - Design flagging workflows for a world where agents write and merge code, find where today's flag tooling slows agentic development down, and set the bar for what a modern, AI-native flagging platform looks like - Ground your product calls in real knowledge of CI/CD, release cycles, and observability tooling, and reason concretely about server vs. client compute tradeoffs and how flags behave differently in browser vs. native apps - Work with engineers as a peer - read code, follow the technical debate, and make the call when tradeoffs get messy - Get into deal cycles directly and know what it takes to close enterprise flagging deals - Own what good documentation and developer experience looks like for this product, and find and fix the enablement gaps across a large sales org - Own this product area from vision through GTM execution, and communicate progress and strategy to senior leadership and executives We need to preserve all detail. Each bullet as
• . Now Requirements/Qualifications/Skills: The "Who you are:" list. Extract: - You have +5 years of experience working closely with engineering teams, ideally as an engineer yourself, with a track record of owning a product area end to end - You have +2 years writing code that shipped to production through a full release cycle, and know what to expect from CI/CD, flagging, and observability tools because you've used them - You have real technical understanding of software architecture - why teams trade off server vs. client compute, and how browser and native apps differ - You have excellent written and verbal communication skills: you read and listen fast, write and speak clearly, and can talk to engineers as a peer - You have B2B experience - you've personally helped close deals, you know what makes developer docs and devex good, and you can diagnose and fix enablement problems across a large sales team - You are AI-fluent: you've shipped code with agentic tools yourself and know firsthand where AI tooling creates friction in the SDLC - You are based in New York City and able to work from our office 3 days a week - Bonus: prior experience with observability tooling, experimentation platforms, or distributed systems Note: The location and schedule appears again; we already have Schedule section. We could keep it here as part of requirements (location requirement). But we already have schedule section; we could keep it in both? Might be duplication but okay. However we might want to avoid duplication. The instruction: preserve ALL substantive information; we can keep it in both sections, but it's not required. I'd rather keep location in Requirements (as a requirement) and schedule in Schedule (as work expectation). But they are same statement. Could keep in Requirements and not duplicate in Schedule? But we need Schedule section because we have info about office 3 days a week. If we put it only in Requirements, we still have schedule info. But the instruction says include a section ONLY when the posting has real, specific content for it. We have schedule content (NYC, 3 days a week). So we need Schedule section. We can keep the same sentence there; duplication is okay but not ideal. However we could keep it only in Schedule and remove from Requirements. But then we lose the location requirement from Requirements. However location is also a requirement (based in NYC). So we need it in Requirements as well. So duplication is fine. Thus we keep both. Now Benefits: The "Benefits & Growth:" section. Extract bullet points: - New hire stock equity (RSUs) and employee stock purchase plan (ESPP) - Continuous professional development, product training, and career pathing - Intra-departmental mentor and buddy program for in-house networking - An inclusive company culture, ability to join our Community Guilds - Access to Inclusion Talks, our Internal panel discussions - Free, global Spring Health benefits for employees and dependents age 6+ - Competitive global benefits - Benefits and Growth listed above may vary based on the country of your employment and the nature of your employment with Datadog. - Datadog offers a competitive salary and equity package, and may include variable compensation. Actual compensation is based on factors such as the candidate's skills, qualifications, and experience. - In addition, Datadog offers a wide range of best in class, comprehensive and inclusive employee benefits for this role including healthcare, dental, parental planning, and mental health benefits, a 401(k) plan and match, paid time off, fitness reimbursements, and a discounted employee stock purchase plan. We need to