Technical Program Manager, Pipeline Evaluation
Crux AI · Palo Alto, CA · 1 mo ago
HybridInformation TechnologyFull-time
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 content. The posting includes: "What You'll Do" (responsibilities), "In This Role, You Will" (more responsibilities), "SIGNALS OF SUCCESS" (maybe qualifications or expectations), "Experiences EXPERIENCES, ATTRIBUTES AND MINDSET THAT INDICATE A GOOD MATCH" (requirements/qualifications/skills), "Nice To Have (preferred, Not Required)" (maybe qualifications), "Salary Range Information" (pay), "About Crux" (benefits). Also there is some intro about company (maybe About the role? Actually "About Crux" is about company benefits). There's no explicit schedule. So we will include sections: About the role? The intro maybe "About the role" could be the first paragraph describing the role. But we have "What You'll Do" as responsibilities. We could treat the initial paragraph as "About the role". Let's parse.
We need to preserve all substantive information, not invent. Remove boilerplate like cookie/navigation/legal/EEO etc. There's none.
We need to use
for sections like About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule. Only include sections that have real content. The posting includes: "What You'll Do" (responsibilities), "In This Role, You Will" (more responsibilities), "SIGNALS OF SUCCESS" (maybe qualifications or expectations), "Experiences EXPERIENCES, ATTRIBUTES AND MINDSET THAT INDICATE A GOOD MATCH" (requirements/qualifications/skills), "Nice To Have (preferred, Not Required)" (maybe qualifications), "Salary Range Information" (pay), "About Crux" (benefits). Also there is some intro about company (maybe About the role? Actually "About Crux" is about company benefits). There's no explicit schedule. So we will include sections: About the role? The intro maybe "About the role" could be the first paragraph describing the role. But we have "What You'll Do" as responsibilities. We could treat the initial paragraph as "About the role". Let's parse.
We need to preserve all substantive information, not invent. Remove boilerplate like cookie/navigation/legal/EEO etc. There's none.
We need to use for section headings. Use - for any list of duties/requirements/benefits, and
for prose.
We need to output only HTML fragment.
Let's extract content:
Intro paragraph: "Built to set the gold standard for integrated AI infrastructure Crux AI is a newly formed, U.S.-based integrated AI infrastructure company created to remove the physical and operational constraints on consequential AI ambitions. Crux brings together power, high-density data centers, TPU silicon, networking, orchestration software, and ongoing operations as one integrated system. Crux is being capitalized to plan every layer together, develop each one to demanding standards, and operate the whole system with efficiency and reliability. That gives hyperscalers, frontier AI labs, sovereign customers, enterprises, and AI-native companies greater freedom to pursue the AI they are here to create."
That's about the company, could be "About Crux" but we already have "About Crux" later with benefits. Might combine? The later "About Crux" section lists benefits. We'll keep intro as maybe "About the role" or "About Crux". Since we have a later "About Crux" benefits, we could label the intro as "About the role". But the instruction: use
for section headings (e.g. About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule). So we can have "About the role" heading for the company overview.
Then responsibilities: "What You'll Do" and "In This Role, You Will". Combine into responsibilities list.
Let's list responsibilities bullet points:
- Own the ongoing match between projected TPU/chip supply and Crux's data center capacity pipeline — the core input to every build-or-lease, land, and lease-capacity decision.
- Evaluate the active portfolio of 40+ live project possibilities as a weighted, categorized system, and produce the recommendation set that goes to leadership.
- Maintain the master interdependency tracker linking chip supply, site readiness, and capacity commitments — surfacing resource conflicts and sequencing risk before they become delays.
- Build and own the capacity plan of record, and drive cross-functional accountability across Finance, Development, and Operations to keep it current.
- Partner directly with Google's supply-side teams to translate chip delivery timelines into actionable Crux capacity decisions.
- Run scenario analysis on supply delays, demand shifts, and site delays, with utilization and financial impact quantified for each.
- Default to AI-agentic workflows for portfolio modeling and scenario analysis — this is not a spreadsheet-reconciliation role.
Also earlier: "You will own the math that keeps Crux from buying chips it has nowhere to put. Crux's compute pipeline runs on TPU capacity supplied through our partnership with Google — chip cost dramatically outweighs data center power cost, so idle chip inventory with no site to plug into is the failure mode this role exists to prevent. You will evaluate Crux's full portfolio of 40-plus live project possibilities as a single system, not deal by deal, and produce the recommendation that goes to the Chief Program Manager's organization on which projects to pursue, sequence, or pass on. This is capacity math with real financial consequences, at GW scale."
These are also responsibilities; we can incorporate.
Now Signals of Success: after 60 days, after 6 months, after 1 year. Could be under "Expectations" or "Signals of Success". Not a standard heading but we could treat as "Qualifications" or maybe "Expectations". The instruction only lists certain headings; we should only include those headings if we have content. We could put Signals of Success under "Qualifications" or "Requirements"? Might be better to create a section "Qualifications" for required experience etc. But Signals of Success are more about performance expectations; could be under "Responsibilities" as expected outcomes. However we already have responsibilities; we could add a subsection but we must not invent headings not listed. We could incorporate them into responsibilities as prose.
Experiences, Attributes and Mindset: that's requirements/qualifications/skills. We'll parse.
Experiences: "8+ years in technical program management, capacity planning, or supply/demand planning for cloud, hardware, or other capital-intensive infrastructure. Direct experience evaluating a multi-project portfolio as a system — weighing, sequencing, and recommending across dozens of live opportunities, not analyzing deals one at a time. Quantitative fluency with capacity, cost, and schedule modeling at a level you can defend the numbers yourself, not hand off to an analyst."
Attributes: "Close enough to the work to be useful — you'd rather build the model yourself than manage someone else's spreadsheet, and you stay close enough to know when something is off before it shows up in a leadership deck. You recommend a reasonable deal, not just a perfect one — a portfolio of only risk-free projects isn't a real strategy."
Mindset: "High tolerance for ambiguity. The portfolio changes weekly, and your model has to keep up without a formal spec telling you how. AI-agentic first. Fluent with AI agents, or committed to becoming so quickly, and you embed them as first principles in how you and your team work, defaulting to agentic workflows before adding headcount or process."
Nice To Have: list items.
Salary Range Information: paragraph about salary range estimated; we need to include Pay section only if posting actually states them. It says "The annual salary range for this position has been estimated based on market data and other factors. However, a salary higher or lower than this range may be appropriate for a candidate whose qualifications differ meaningfully from those listed in the job description." That's not a specific range; it's vague. According to instruction: never create Pay/Schedule/Benefits sections unless the posting actually states them. It does not give a specific range; it's just saying estimated. Might be considered not stating them. Safer to omit Pay section.
Benefits: "About Crux We offer generous base, bonus and additional incentive based compensation Health, dental, and vision coverage for you and your dependents Company-paid life insurance and disability Full suite of other optional benefits 401(k) Plan with 4% company match (USA employees)". That's benefits. So we include Benefits section.
Schedule: none.
Thus sections: About the role (company overview), Responsibilities, Requirements (or Qualifications?), Benefits. Could also have Qualifications separate from Requirements? The instruction list includes Requirements, Qualifications, Skills. We could combine experiences/attributes/mindset into Requirements. Or we could split: Requirements (experience), Qualifications (attributes/ mindset), Skills (nice to have). But we need to avoid thin sections. Better to have one Requirements section covering experiences, attributes, mindset, and nice-to-have as a subsection? But we need to use - for any list. We can have a list for required experience, another for attributes, another for mindset, and another for nice-to-have. All under Requirements heading? Might be okay.
Let's structure:
About the role
Intro paragraph.
Responsibilities
- ...
...
Requirements
Maybe split into subheadings? Not allowed; only h3 for section headings. Could have multiple
sections: Required Experience, Attributes, Mindset, Nice-to-Have. Those are not in the list but could be considered as subheadings? 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 says "use for section headings (e.g. ...)". It implies we should use those standard headings; but we could also use other headings if needed? Safer to stick to the given list. So we can have Requirements, Qualifications, Skills sections.
Thus we can map:
- Required Experience: under Requirements.
- Qualifications: maybe Attributes+Mindset? Or we could put Attributes under Qualifications, Mindset under Skills? Not ideal.
Better: Use Requirements for experience, Qualifications for attributes and mindset, Skills for nice-to-have.
Let's do:
Requirements
- 8+ years in technical program management, capacity planning, or supply/demand planning for cloud, hardware, or other capital-intensive infrastructure.
- Direct experience evaluating a multi-project portfolio as a system — weighing, sequencing, and recommending across dozens of live opportunities, not analyzing deals one at a time.
- Quantitative fluency with capacity, cost, and schedule modeling at a level you can defend the numbers yourself, not hand off to an analyst.
Qualifications
- Close enough to the work to be useful — you'd rather build the model yourself than manage someone else's spreadsheet, and you stay close enough to know when something is off before it shows up in a leadership deck.
- You recommend a reasonable deal, not just a perfect one — a portfolio of only risk-free projects isn't a real strategy.
- High tolerance for ambiguity. The portfolio changes weekly, and your model has to keep up without a formal spec telling you how.
- AI-agentic first. Fluent with AI agents, or committed to becoming so quickly, and you embed them as first principles in how you and your team work, defaulting to agentic workflows before adding headcount or process.
Skills
- Experience with GPU or TPU capacity planning specifically — cluster deployments, chip allocation, or accelerated-compute fleet management.
- Familiarity with data center development timelines, power procurement, and site readiness milestones.
- Background in operations research, portfolio optimization, or capital allocation modeling.
- Neocloud or hyperscaler experience (CoreWeave, Nebius, Nscale, Lambda, Google, AWS, Meta, Microsoft) in a capacity or supply-planning seat.
Benefits
- Generous base, bonus and additional incentive based compensation
- Health, dental, and vision coverage for you and your dependents
- Company-paid life insurance and disability
- Full suite of other optional benefits
- 401(k) Plan with 4% company match (USA employees)
We need to ensure we didn't miss any substantive info: The Signals of Success (60 days, 6 months, 1 year) we omitted. Should we include them? They are substantive expectations. Could be placed under Responsibilities as expected outcomes, or under a separate section like "Expectations". Since not in list, maybe incorporate into Responsibilities as additional bullet points.
Add bullet
- for any list of duties/requirements/benefits, and
for prose. We need to output only HTML fragment. Let's extract content: Intro paragraph: "Built to set the gold standard for integrated AI infrastructure Crux AI is a newly formed, U.S.-based integrated AI infrastructure company created to remove the physical and operational constraints on consequential AI ambitions. Crux brings together power, high-density data centers, TPU silicon, networking, orchestration software, and ongoing operations as one integrated system. Crux is being capitalized to plan every layer together, develop each one to demanding standards, and operate the whole system with efficiency and reliability. That gives hyperscalers, frontier AI labs, sovereign customers, enterprises, and AI-native companies greater freedom to pursue the AI they are here to create." That's about the company, could be "About Crux" but we already have "About Crux" later with benefits. Might combine? The later "About Crux" section lists benefits. We'll keep intro as maybe "About the role" or "About Crux". Since we have a later "About Crux" benefits, we could label the intro as "About the role". But the instruction: use
for section headings (e.g. About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule). So we can have "About the role" heading for the company overview. Then responsibilities: "What You'll Do" and "In This Role, You Will". Combine into responsibilities list. Let's list responsibilities bullet points: - Own the ongoing match between projected TPU/chip supply and Crux's data center capacity pipeline — the core input to every build-or-lease, land, and lease-capacity decision. - Evaluate the active portfolio of 40+ live project possibilities as a weighted, categorized system, and produce the recommendation set that goes to leadership. - Maintain the master interdependency tracker linking chip supply, site readiness, and capacity commitments — surfacing resource conflicts and sequencing risk before they become delays. - Build and own the capacity plan of record, and drive cross-functional accountability across Finance, Development, and Operations to keep it current. - Partner directly with Google's supply-side teams to translate chip delivery timelines into actionable Crux capacity decisions. - Run scenario analysis on supply delays, demand shifts, and site delays, with utilization and financial impact quantified for each. - Default to AI-agentic workflows for portfolio modeling and scenario analysis — this is not a spreadsheet-reconciliation role. Also earlier: "You will own the math that keeps Crux from buying chips it has nowhere to put. Crux's compute pipeline runs on TPU capacity supplied through our partnership with Google — chip cost dramatically outweighs data center power cost, so idle chip inventory with no site to plug into is the failure mode this role exists to prevent. You will evaluate Crux's full portfolio of 40-plus live project possibilities as a single system, not deal by deal, and produce the recommendation that goes to the Chief Program Manager's organization on which projects to pursue, sequence, or pass on. This is capacity math with real financial consequences, at GW scale." These are also responsibilities; we can incorporate. Now Signals of Success: after 60 days, after 6 months, after 1 year. Could be under "Expectations" or "Signals of Success". Not a standard heading but we could treat as "Qualifications" or maybe "Expectations". The instruction only lists certain headings; we should only include those headings if we have content. We could put Signals of Success under "Qualifications" or "Requirements"? Might be better to create a section "Qualifications" for required experience etc. But Signals of Success are more about performance expectations; could be under "Responsibilities" as expected outcomes. However we already have responsibilities; we could add a subsection but we must not invent headings not listed. We could incorporate them into responsibilities as prose. Experiences, Attributes and Mindset: that's requirements/qualifications/skills. We'll parse. Experiences: "8+ years in technical program management, capacity planning, or supply/demand planning for cloud, hardware, or other capital-intensive infrastructure. Direct experience evaluating a multi-project portfolio as a system — weighing, sequencing, and recommending across dozens of live opportunities, not analyzing deals one at a time. Quantitative fluency with capacity, cost, and schedule modeling at a level you can defend the numbers yourself, not hand off to an analyst." Attributes: "Close enough to the work to be useful — you'd rather build the model yourself than manage someone else's spreadsheet, and you stay close enough to know when something is off before it shows up in a leadership deck. You recommend a reasonable deal, not just a perfect one — a portfolio of only risk-free projects isn't a real strategy." Mindset: "High tolerance for ambiguity. The portfolio changes weekly, and your model has to keep up without a formal spec telling you how. AI-agentic first. Fluent with AI agents, or committed to becoming so quickly, and you embed them as first principles in how you and your team work, defaulting to agentic workflows before adding headcount or process." Nice To Have: list items. Salary Range Information: paragraph about salary range estimated; we need to include Pay section only if posting actually states them. It says "The annual salary range for this position has been estimated based on market data and other factors. However, a salary higher or lower than this range may be appropriate for a candidate whose qualifications differ meaningfully from those listed in the job description." That's not a specific range; it's vague. According to instruction: never create Pay/Schedule/Benefits sections unless the posting actually states them. It does not give a specific range; it's just saying estimated. Might be considered not stating them. Safer to omit Pay section. Benefits: "About Crux We offer generous base, bonus and additional incentive based compensation Health, dental, and vision coverage for you and your dependents Company-paid life insurance and disability Full suite of other optional benefits 401(k) Plan with 4% company match (USA employees)". That's benefits. So we include Benefits section. Schedule: none. Thus sections: About the role (company overview), Responsibilities, Requirements (or Qualifications?), Benefits. Could also have Qualifications separate from Requirements? The instruction list includes Requirements, Qualifications, Skills. We could combine experiences/attributes/mindset into Requirements. Or we could split: Requirements (experience), Qualifications (attributes/ mindset), Skills (nice to have). But we need to avoid thin sections. Better to have one Requirements section covering experiences, attributes, mindset, and nice-to-have as a subsection? But we need to use
- for any list. We can have a list for required experience, another for attributes, another for mindset, and another for nice-to-have. All under Requirements heading? Might be okay.
Let's structure:
About the role
Intro paragraph.
Responsibilities
- ... ...
Requirements
Maybe split into subheadings? Not allowed; only h3 for section headings. Could have multiple
sections: Required Experience, Attributes, Mindset, Nice-to-Have. Those are not in the list but could be considered as subheadings? 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 says "use
for section headings (e.g. ...)". It implies we should use those standard headings; but we could also use other headings if needed? Safer to stick to the given list. So we can have Requirements, Qualifications, Skills sections. Thus we can map: - Required Experience: under Requirements. - Qualifications: maybe Attributes+Mindset? Or we could put Attributes under Qualifications, Mindset under Skills? Not ideal. Better: Use Requirements for experience, Qualifications for attributes and mindset, Skills for nice-to-have. Let's do:
Requirements
- 8+ years in technical program management, capacity planning, or supply/demand planning for cloud, hardware, or other capital-intensive infrastructure.
- Direct experience evaluating a multi-project portfolio as a system — weighing, sequencing, and recommending across dozens of live opportunities, not analyzing deals one at a time.
- Quantitative fluency with capacity, cost, and schedule modeling at a level you can defend the numbers yourself, not hand off to an analyst.
Qualifications
- Close enough to the work to be useful — you'd rather build the model yourself than manage someone else's spreadsheet, and you stay close enough to know when something is off before it shows up in a leadership deck.
- You recommend a reasonable deal, not just a perfect one — a portfolio of only risk-free projects isn't a real strategy.
- High tolerance for ambiguity. The portfolio changes weekly, and your model has to keep up without a formal spec telling you how.
- AI-agentic first. Fluent with AI agents, or committed to becoming so quickly, and you embed them as first principles in how you and your team work, defaulting to agentic workflows before adding headcount or process.
Skills
- Experience with GPU or TPU capacity planning specifically — cluster deployments, chip allocation, or accelerated-compute fleet management.
- Familiarity with data center development timelines, power procurement, and site readiness milestones.
- Background in operations research, portfolio optimization, or capital allocation modeling.
- Neocloud or hyperscaler experience (CoreWeave, Nebius, Nscale, Lambda, Google, AWS, Meta, Microsoft) in a capacity or supply-planning seat.
Benefits
- Generous base, bonus and additional incentive based compensation
- Health, dental, and vision coverage for you and your dependents
- Company-paid life insurance and disability
- Full suite of other optional benefits
- 401(k) Plan with 4% company match (USA employees)
- for any list. We can have a list for required experience, another for attributes, another for mindset, and another for nice-to-have. All under Requirements heading? Might be okay.
Let's structure: