From support questions to product investment decisions

Mandate

Make product recommendations respect the constraints of the user's physical task.

Outcomes

• Distinguished nominal width from usable layout boundaries
• Withheld suggestions that could not preserve direction constraints
• Separated illustrative printing from working-scale preparation

Decisions in context

As CPO I lead the definition of the product problem and the evidence behind its priorities. Twenty-eight colleagues work through three leads across product, research and design. Engineering has a separate CTO and delivery depends on a shared plan rather than authority I claim over every technical decision. The three cases here required us to accept a less convenient result:an additional width distinction, a longer valid layout and a more explicit print choice. I had supported the earlier simplifications, so the correction includes my own judgement and the resources needed to change it. I present product matters to directors without holding a statutory seat. The role asks me to connect a user's task with investment and a credible commercial account, including when the product should say that a requested automatic answer is not yet available.

Reason for the move

Current appointment; strengthening the evidence and assumptions behind specialist product choices.

Mandate

Prioritise workflow research and design alongside requests for automatic capabilities.

Outcomes

• Reviewed which user choices an automatic feature would conceal
• Connected research findings with release-scope decisions
• Developed clearer explanations of unsupported conditions

Decisions in context

Leading product required me to decide which problems deserved sustained attention rather than simply collect requests. I worked through two leads and with engineering managers to understand what a proposed automation would assume on the user's behalf. Removing a repeated action could be valuable, but removing a decision without making the assumption visible could create a different problem. We began following the task across preparation, layout and output instead of reviewing each screen as though it ended the work. The role also developed my ability to explain why some research findings justified a narrower capability or a delayed release. I became CPO when that responsibility broadened into a more explicit investment and commercial account. The appointment did not turn product leadership into manufacturing authority or statutory board service; it increased my accountability for the choices our product invited people to make.

Reason for the move

Promoted to CPO with wider investment and commercial-account responsibility.

Mandate

Translate specialist preparation tasks into product behaviour users can inspect.

Outcomes

• Represented dimensions and direction constraints in product requirements
• Separated design views from downstream output purposes
• Worked with specialists to define bounded acceptance examples

Decisions in context

Joining Selquvi brought my research experience into a more focused product setting. I worked with garment-pattern specialists and engineers to understand which decisions should be represented explicitly and which remained outside the software's responsibility. A dimension could describe a nominal material or a usable area. A view could support discussion without being suitable for the next production step. I wanted the requirements to preserve those differences rather than reduce every question to a cleaner interaction. Leading seven colleagues by departure also required me to explain the reasoning so that others could make consistent choices. The move to function leadership broadened the same work across several product priorities. It required judgement about where to invest and what not to promise, while retaining the customer's authority over construction and acceptance in the actual manufacturing setting.

Reason for the move

Advanced to lead the broader product and research function.

Mandate

Understand the sequence and handovers around a digital design task.

Outcomes

• Followed outputs beyond the screen where they were created
• Distinguished task observations from broad market claims
• Connected user assumptions with proposed interaction changes

Decisions in context

Research gave me time to follow the work that support conversations only partly revealed. I observed how a professional prepared a design, checked it and passed an output to another person or device. An interaction could be understandable in isolation while leaving the next person with a different assumption. I learned to describe the setting and limits of each observation instead of treating a small set of visits as a universal account. By the end of the role I led four researchers and organised a defined programme of work. Moving into product management meant taking responsibility for a choice after the research, including the trade-off and the explanation of what remained uncertain. Selquvi offered a specialist setting where the relationship between digital preparation and physical use was central to the product rather than an occasional support issue.

Reason for the move

Joined Selquvi to take product responsibility for specialist pattern workflows.

Mandate

Reproduce user problems in the context of the task and its next handover.

Outcomes

• Recorded intended output use alongside defect descriptions
• Distinguished unclear instructions from changed product behaviour
• Learned from specialists responsible for physical acceptance

Decisions in context

I started after completing design studies and worked under a support manager. The user often described a difficulty in terms of the result on paper or at the workbench, rather than the operation that had produced it. I learned to ask what they intended to do next and to reproduce the path without assuming that a successful command meant a successful task. My authority was limited to support work and escalation; I did not approve expenditure or decide manufacturing suitability. The role taught me respect for specialists who could explain why a direction, line or dimension mattered. Moving into research gave me a way to investigate recurring patterns more carefully and to understand the work before proposing a change. It also helped me distinguish a genuine product simplification from an interface that merely hid the user's next difficult decision.

Reason for the move

Moved into workflow research to investigate recurring task-level problems.