Sustaining Quality and Reliability Engineer

We need to output HTML fragment with sections for headings: About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements (or Qualifications), Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule. Only include sections that have real specific content. The posting includes description of role (About the role). Responsibilities are listed. Minimum Qualifications and Preferred Qualifications can be under Requirements or Qualifications. Skills maybe not explicit; we could combine qualifications. Benefits: posting mentions bonus + equity + benefits but not details; we should not create Benefits section unless specific content. Pay: salary range given: $208,000/year to $289,000/year + bonus + equity + benefits. That's specific pay info, so we can include Pay section. Schedule: not mentioned, so omit. Benefits: not specific details, so omit. Skills: maybe we can infer from qualifications but not explicit list; better to omit Skills section unless we have explicit list. The instructions: "Prefer a few substantive sections over many thin ones." So we can have About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements (combining min and pref qualifications), Pay. Possibly also a short meta paragraph for Job ID etc but we drop. We must use

for section headings. Use

• for any list of duties/requirements/benefits. Use

  for prose. We need to preserve all substantive information, not invent or summarize away detail. So we need to include all responsibilities bullet points, qualifications bullet points, etc. We must not repeat job title as heading. Not include Job ID/requisition numbers. We must remove boilerplate like EEO etc. Also remove "About Meta" maybe? The instruction: remove cookie/navigation/legal/EEO/equal-opportunity/scam-warning boilerplate, duplicated lines, and application instructions. The "About Meta" paragraph is not exactly boilerplate but could be considered company description; it's not a required section heading. Should we keep it? It's substantive info about company but not under a heading. The instruction: "Preserve ALL substantive information; do NOT invent or summarize away detail." So we should keep the About Meta paragraph as prose, maybe under a heading? But we only create headings when there is real specific content for that heading. The About Meta paragraph is not under a heading like "About the role". It's just company overview. We could include it as a

  before any headings, or maybe under a heading "About Meta"? But 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 suggests those are typical. However we should not create headings unless the posting has real specific content for it. The posting does have an "About Meta" section with substantive content. So we could create a heading "About Meta". But the list of examples didn't include About Meta, but it's not prohibited. However the instruction: "Use

  for section headings (e.g. About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule)." The "e.g." implies those are examples, not exhaustive. So we could add About Meta heading. But we need to decide: The user likely expects sections: About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements (maybe combine min/pref), Pay. Possibly also About Meta. However they said "Prefer a few substantive sections over many thin ones." So maybe we combine About Meta into About the role? But About the role is already about the role. The About Meta is separate. Could we include it as a paragraph under About the role? That would mix role description with company description, but still substantive. Might be okay. Better to follow the examples: include About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Pay. Omit Benefits, Skills, Schedule. We need to include all substantive info: role description paragraph, responsibilities bullet list, qualifications (min and pref) bullet list, pay range. We must not include the "About Meta" paragraph if we omit it; that would lose substantive info. So we need to include it somewhere. Could we include it as a paragraph under About the role? That would be mixing but still preserve info. The instruction: "Preserve ALL substantive information; do NOT invent or summarize away detail." So we can include it as part of About the role section prose. That seems acceptable. Thus About the role section will contain the initial paragraph describing the role plus the About Meta paragraph. Now responsibilities: we need to extract bullet points from the long responsibilities block. The block after "Sustaining Quality and Reliability Engineer Responsibilities:" includes many sentences, some are long and contain multiple duties separated by line breaks? Actually it's a paragraph with many duties separated by line breaks? In the text, after "Responsibilities:" there is a long sentence with many clauses separated by line breaks? Let's parse: "Own the reliability and quality engineering strategy and metrics (field return rate, failure rate, and quality KPIs) for all products actively out in the market or currently scaling in manufacturing, from launch through end of life, and set the bar for what good looks like across the portfolioDrive systemic resolution of field performance issues, component obsolescence, and return-rate (RMA/warranty) optimization to root cause and corrective action, in partnership with cross-functional internal and external partners, including recurring and cross-product failure modesPartner with and influence internal leaders and external suppliers to ensure long-term hardware field performance, and close the loop by institutionalizing lessons learned into design, NPI, and supplier processesDefine and own the field signal analytics, product health telemetry, and failure-reaction frameworks the organization relies onset thresholds and escalation triggers for products in the fieldEstablish the standards, methodologies, and metrics for sustaining reliability and quality, including ongoing reliability testing (e.g., ORT), excursion/ECO assessment, post-ramp qualifications (PRQ) and change control against reliability and quality goalsLead complex, multidisciplinary root cause analysis for reliability and quality escapes, distinguishing between design, material, manufacturing-process, and use-condition contributors, and drive corrective actions to closureProvide Design-for-Reliability and architectural evaluations that carry field and sustaining learnings into new product categories and next-generation designsOwn the quality management system for products in sustainingunderstand, analyze, and resolve field quality issues and influence internal teams to drive durable quality improvementsTranslate reliability and quality data into risk assessments, reports, and positions that inform executive product and business decisionsMentor and technically guide reliability and quality engineers across the function, raising the capability of the team" It seems there are missing spaces and line breaks. We need to split into sensible bullet points. Likely each sentence starts with a verb: Own..., Drive..., Partner..., Define..., Establish..., Lead..., Provide..., Own..., Understand..., Translate..., Mentor... We need to preserve all substantive information; we can split into bullet points at each major clause. Let's identify: 1. Own the reliability and quality engineering strategy and metrics (field return rate, failure rate, and quality KPIs) for all products actively out in the market or currently scaling in manufacturing, from launch through end of life, and set the bar for what good looks like across the portfolio 2. Drive systemic resolution of field performance issues, component obsolescence, and return-rate (RMA/warranty) optimization to root cause and corrective action, in partnership with cross-functional internal and external partners, including recurring and cross-product failure modes 3. Partner with and influence internal leaders and external suppliers to ensure long-term hardware field performance, and close the loop by institutionalizing lessons learned into design, NPI, and supplier processes 4. Define and own the field signal analytics, product health telemetry, and failure-reaction frameworks the organization relies on (maybe missing word) onset thresholds and escalation triggers for products in the field 5. Establish the standards, methodologies, and metrics for sustaining reliability and quality, including ongoing reliability testing (e.g., ORT), excursion/ECO assessment, post-ramp qualifications (PRQ) and change control against reliability and quality goals 6. Lead complex, multidisciplinary root cause analysis for reliability and quality escapes, distinguishing between design, material, manufacturing-process, and use-condition contributors, and drive corrective actions to closure 7. Provide Design-for-Reliability and architectural evaluations that carry field and sustaining learnings into new product categories and next-generation designs 8. Own the quality management system for products in sustaining (maybe missing word) understand, analyze, and resolve field quality issues and influence internal teams to drive durable quality improvements 9. Translate reliability and quality data into risk assessments, reports, and positions that inform executive product and business decisions 10. Mentor and technically guide reliability and quality engineers across the function, raising the capability of the team We need to keep the exact wording as much as possible. We'll copy each bullet as a

  . Now qualifications: Minimum Qualifications list: - Bachelor's degree in Computer Science, Computer Engineering, relevant technical field, or equivalent practical experience - Bachelor's degree in Mechanical, Materials, or Electrical Engineering, a relevant technical field, or equivalent practical experience - 10+ years of experience in hardware reliability engineering and/or product quality for consumer electronics, wearable devices, or similar electro-mechanical products - Knowledge of mechanical design, material science, and the failure mechanisms of consumer electronics - Experience driving root cause analysis, design of experiments (DOE), and corrective action on complex hardware systems - Experience analyzing reliability data, field return, and warranty metrics to identify systemic failure trends and drive engineering corrective actions - Knowledge of industry test standards including ASTM, MIL, JEDEC, and IEC - Knowledge of failure analysis techniques and tools including optical microscopy, X-Ray, CT scan, SEM, EDX, and FTIR - Experience independently driving decisions and dependencies across multiple teams or functions in a dynamic environment Preferred Qualifications list: - Track record of defining mission profiles and reliability/quality strategy for new product categories - Experience with data mining and data visualization to make strategic business decisions, and with Asia high-volume manufacturing and external partner relationship management - MS or higher in Mechanical Engineering, Materials Science, Electrical Engineering, or equivalent discipline - Familiarity with Weibull analysis, reliability growth modeling, and statistical reliability prediction methods - 12+ years of experience, including field/sustaining reliability and post-launch product improvement for VR, AR, or wearable device product lines (display, optics, battery, sensor subsystem failure modes) - Experience with quality and statistics tools and methodology (8D, PFMEA, SPC, DOE) - Certified Quality Engineer or Lean/Six Sigma Black Belt - Experience using AI tools to redesign reliability/quality data analysis workflows, accelerate failure-pattern identification, or improve reporting efficiency We need to include both min and pref under Requirements section. Could separate into Minimum Qualifications and Preferred Qualifications subheadings? But instruction says use

  for section headings (e.g. About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications...). So we could have a single Requirements section with both min and pref, maybe using

  • for each. Or we could have two subheadings but they'd be

    not allowed? Not specified. Safer to combine into one Requirements section with bullet points, maybe separate with a

    indicating Minimum Qualifications and Preferred Qualifications. But we must not invent headings like "Minimum Qualifications" as

    unless we want to. Could use

    Minimum Qualifications:

    then list. That's acceptable. We need to preserve all substantive info; we can include the text exactly. Pay section: include the salary range line: "$208,000/year to $289,000/year + bonus + equity + benefits". Also note "Individual compensation is determined by skills, qualifications, experience, and location." and "Compensation details listed in this posting reflect the base hourly rate, monthly rate, or annual salary only, and do not include bonus, equity or sales incentives, if applicable." and "In addition to base compensation, Meta offers benefits. Learn more about benefits at Meta." We should keep all that. Now About the role section: include the initial paragraph describing the role (starting "As a Sustaining Reli