Vice President, Engineering

We need to output HTML fragment with headings

for sections: About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule. Only include sections that have real specific content. We must not repeat job title. Must not include Job ID etc. Remove boilerplate. We need to parse the posting and extract sections. Let's identify content: - About Us: description of company, product, etc. Could be "About the role"? Actually "About Us" is about company. The instruction says use headings like About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule. So we need to map content accordingly. We have sections in posting: - About Us (company description) - The role (description of role) - What You'll Own (list of responsibilities) - What We're Looking For (requirements/qualifications/skills) - Your first year (maybe expectations, could be part of responsibilities or qualifications) - Why this role (maybe benefits? but it's more selling points) - Also location: Toronto or Remote (maybe schedule? Not exactly) - No explicit Pay, Benefits, Schedule given. So we should not include those sections unless present. There's no mention of pay, benefits, schedule. So we omit Pay, Benefits, Schedule. We need to include sections only if there is real specific content. Thus we can have:

About the role

maybe combine About Us and The role? But "About the role" heading expects description of role. We have "The role" section. So we can put that under About the role. We also need Responsibilities: from "What You'll Own" which lists responsibilities. Requirements/Qualifications/Skills: from "What We're Looking For" (includes cloud infrastructure, product instinct, team leadership, AI fluency, startup temperament, nice to have). Could split into Requirements (must-have) and Qualifications (nice-to-have) and Skills (maybe technical). But we can combine into one section if we want fewer sections. The instruction: Prefer a few substantive sections over many thin ones. So we could have sections: About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements (covering must-have and nice-to-have), maybe Skills separate? But we can incorporate skills within Requirements. However they ask to use headings for Skills as possible. But we can omit if not distinct. We also have "Your first year" which could be part of Responsibilities or maybe a separate section like "Expectations". Not a standard heading; we could fold into Responsibilities. Thus final HTML:

About the role

... content from About Us and The role combined.

Responsibilities

• ... each bullet from What You'll Own.

Requirements

• ... must-have items from What We're Looking For.

Maybe also a

Skills

for technical skills? But we can incorporate. We need to preserve ALL substantive information; do not invent or summarize away detail. So we need to keep details like "You'll own engineering execution for Conductor: how the team is structured, how work gets from idea to production, and how quickly and reliably we ship." etc. We must not include boilerplate like "Apply for this role" etc. Let's extract. About Us paragraph: "Sensei Labs builds Conductor, an enterprise strategy execution platform that governs billions of dollars in program value across hundreds of enterprise programs. Our customers are Fortune 500 transformation offices, global consultancies, and private equity value creation teams. Conductor covers the full lifecycle from portfolio planning through benefits realization, with our Harmony AI layer woven into every surface rather than bolted on. We've been in the market for more than ten years, we're SOC-2 compliant with a single-tenant architecture, and we do all of it with a deliberately small team. That's the interesting part of this job. We launched a full rewrite of our Conductor platform a few months ago and are midway through the effort to reach Conductor Modern. Over the next year (or so), this will give us the chance to migrate all our customers and partners to the new version and sunset our old code." The role paragraph: "You'll own engineering execution for Conductor: how the team is structured, how work gets from idea to production, and how quickly and reliably we ship. You'll drive the technical strategy and architecture direction, and you'll own the machine that turns that direction into shipped software. This is a hands-on leadership role, not a role that manages managers. With six engineers, you'll be in the code, in the reviews, and in the architecture discussions — while also being the person accountable for delivery, hiring, growth, and the team's day-to-day health. If you want a position where you can both set long-term strategy and have immediate day-to-day impact, this is the seat. As part of our modernization, you’ll be directly involved in any remaining architectural and technical decisions for Conductor Modern and be a key part of planning for the customer migration and the ultimate sunsetting of the existing codebase. This is the third leg of the Sensei Labs stool, along with our established Product and GTM leaders. You’ll work closely with them to shape and implement Product’s vision and to enable our GTM team to sell and deliver value to our customers and partners." We can combine these into About the role. Now Responsibilities from "What You'll Own": List: - Delivery. Planning, sequencing, and shipping against a roadmap you help build with Product. Predictable releases, visible progress, honest tradeoffs. - The team. Coaching and growing six engineers, running performance and career conversations, hiring as we scale, and keeping the bar high without burning people out. - Cloud platform and reliability. Architecture, scalability, cost, and operational excellence for a single-tenant enterprise SaaS platform. Uptime, performance, and security posture are yours. You'll lead our Platform/DevOps team alongside product engineering, setting direction for infrastructure and application architecture, performance and scalability, cloud cost management, and the tooling that the rest of engineering builds on. Uptime, operational excellence, and security posture are yours. - AI in the product. Partnering with Product on how Harmony AI evolves — agentic workflows, retrieval, evaluation, guardrails, and permission-aware AI behavior in an enterprise context. - AI in how we build. Making our SDLC substantially faster and more automated: AI-assisted coding, code review, and test generation; CI/CD; automated quality gates. We want an engineering org where a small team ships like a large one, and you'll be the one who builds that. - Engineering–Product partnership. Working shoulder to shoulder with Product on discovery, scope, and sequencing. You'll be expected to have opinions about the product, not just the plumbing. - Enterprise trust. Security, compliance, and the technical side of customer and prospect conversations when it matters. We need to turn each into

. Might need to split long sentences but keep content. Now Requirements from "What We're Looking For": Must-have: - Cloud infrastructure and application architecture at depth. You've architected, built, and operated production cloud SaaS at meaningful scale — not just supervised it. You're fluent across both layers: the application architecture (service boundaries, data modeling, API design, and the patterns that keep a large codebase evolvable) and the infrastructure underneath it. - Hands-on depth in Azure and/or GCP is essential, along with container orchestration on Kubernetes, infrastructure as code, CI/CD pipelines, networking and identity, and the observability and cost discipline that keep a cloud platform healthy as it grows. - You understand multi-tenancy versus single-tenancy tradeoffs, data isolation, performance under enterprise load, and what "SOC-2 compliant" actually costs an engineering team. - Real product instinct. You've worked in product-led environments where engineering shapes what gets built. You can push back on a spec, spot the simpler solution, and reason about customer value — especially in complex B2B software where the user is an enterprise operator, not a consumer. - Team leadership with your hands still dirty. You've led and grown engineering teams (roughly 5–20 people) as a player-coach. You've hired well, given hard feedback, and relentlessly tuned the delivery process. - AI fluency, both directions. You've shipped AI or LLM-backed features into production — and you've also rebuilt how a team works using AI-assisted development and automated SDLC tooling. You can tell the difference between AI that creates leverage and AI that creates cleanup work. - Startup temperament. You're comfortable being both the strategist and the person who fixes the flaky test. You'd rather own an outcome than a headcount number. Nice to have (could be separate but we can include as part of Requirements or maybe Skills). The instruction: we can have Skills section for nice-to-have. Let's create a Skills section for nice-to-have. Nice to have list: - Enterprise PPM, EPMO, transformation, or professional services domain experience - Experience with Microsoft 365 / SAP / Jira / Power BI integration ecosystems - Background in selling or supporting technical evaluations with Fortune 500 or PE buyers - Experience taking a mature product through an AI-era re-platforming or modernization We could put these under Skills. Also "Your first year" expectations could be added to Responsibilities or a separate section like "Expectations". But we don't have a standard heading for that; we could incorporate into Responsibilities as additional bullets. Let's add bullets for first-year expectations: - By 90 days — you know the codebase, the team, and the roadmap; you've shipped something meaningful yourself; and you've given us a clear read on our biggest delivery and technical risks. - By 6 months — the development lifecycle is measurably faster, with AI-assisted workflows and automated quality gates that the team actually uses. Release cadence is predictable. - By 12 months — engineering is a genuine competitive advantage: shipping AI capability into Conductor at a pace that surprises much larger competitors, with a team that's grown in both size and capability. We can add these under Responsibilities as additional bullets. Now we need to ensure we don't include any boilerplate like "Apply for this role", location line, etc. We also need to not repeat job title. Already not. Now produce HTML fragment:

About the role

Sensei Labs builds Conductor, an enterprise strategy execution platform that governs billions of dollars in program value across hundreds of enterprise programs. Our customers are Fortune 500 transformation offices, global consultancies, and private equity value creation teams. Conductor covers the full lifecycle from portfolio planning through benefits realization, with our Harmony AI layer woven into every surface rather than bolted on. We've been in the market for more than ten years, we're SOC-2 compliant with a single-tenant architecture, and we do all of it with a deliberately small team. That's the interesting part of this job. We launched a full rewrite of our Conductor platform a few months ago and are midway through the effort to reach Conductor Modern. Over the next year (or so), this will give us the chance to migrate all our customers and partners to the new version and sunset our old code. You'll own engineering execution for Conductor: how the team is structured, how work gets from idea to production, and how quickly and reliably we ship. You'll drive the technical strategy and architecture direction, and you'll own the machine that turns that direction into shipped software. This is a hands-on leadership role, not a role that manages managers. With six engineers, you'll be in the code, in the reviews, and in the architecture discussions — while also being the person accountable for delivery, hiring, growth, and the team's day-to-day health. If you want a position where you can both set long-term strategy and have immediate day-to-day impact, this is the seat. As part of our modernization, you’ll be directly involved in any remaining architectural and technical decisions for Conductor Modern and be a key part of planning for the customer migration and the ultimate sunsetting of the existing codebase. This is the third