Skip to website
Merenla ZaqverthiChief Product Officer
Portrait of Merenla Zaqverthi

Chief Product Officer · India

MerenlaZaqverthi

The buyer's approval did not finish the design

I grew up in Mokokchung and became interested in the ordinary work that a product drawing leaves out.

Open to
  • Board appointments
  • Advisory roles
  • Speaking invitations

The buyer's approval did not finish the design

I approved a tray-handling design after a demonstration led by people responsible for buying equipment. Later work with eighteen operators found that eleven needed another person for the proposed handling routine; seven did not report that difficulty. Ruth asked why the people expected to use the cabinet had entered the review after the people authorised to purchase it. I had allowed one kind of approval to stand for a different kind of evidence.

I am Merenla Zaqverthi, the fictional CPO of Lemqavri Thermal Products in Dimapur. We develop solar-assisted drying equipment for small fruit and spice processors. Twenty-nine product colleagues work through four leads, with three external design specialists counted separately. My ₹6.7 crore annual function expense sits within a 230-person enterprise with ₹118 crore FY2026 revenue. Engineering and customer quality owners retain their decisions; product leadership does not certify food, prescribe processing settings or establish a buyer for the output.

The 2017 correction cost ₹68 lakh, including ₹19 lakh customer credits. We investigated a smaller-tray design with qualified engineering and usability review instead of asking operators to accommodate the demonstration's assumptions. The review did not count injuries or establish universal handling suitability. It changed who had to be heard before a product claim became settled. I now examine the purchaser's objective alongside the work and judgement required from people who may never have attended the buying discussion.

A broad application claim became a defined release

Five of twelve proposed crop-and-application combinations had completed the relevant review. The other seven remained under investigation instead of acquiring approval from a multi-crop label.

A trial was allowed to end without an order

Sixteen prospects chose a trial route. Eleven completed it and five withdrew; six of the eleven later purchased, while five did not. The account retained both outcomes without turning every trial into a sales success.

An introduction was kept separate from an offtake promise

Three of nine prospective produce buyers expressed nonbinding conditional interest. Six did not. We removed a market-access promise the equipment proposition could not substantiate.

Current focus

I am connecting equipment propositions with operator research, bounded application evidence and honest decisions about trial and purchase.

Conversations I welcome

Product-development discussions and a possible first outside contribution where the purchaser's promise needs closer examination.

27 years

Equipment and product development

July 1999–October 2026; fictional continuous career

29 colleagues

Product-function employees

Four leads; three external design specialists separately

₹6.7 crore

Annual product expense

Personal function scope, distinct from enterprise revenue

230 people

Company workforce

March 2026; equipment and service business

A product decision should include the people whose work makes the purchase useful. Their interests may differ without any of them misunderstanding the offer. I want the purchaser's promise, the operator's routine and the output buyer's requirements examined together, with a clear account of which conditions our equipment can address and which remain outside it.

Merenla Zaqverthi

Chief Product Officer

Areas of stewardship

Where accountability has been mine.

  1. IResearch beyond the purchasing conversation
  2. IIApplication evidence before a broad release
  3. IIIProduct priorities across different users
  4. IVTrials and promises with honest endings

Selected work

Decisions, and what they changed.

I

I treated a purchaser's demonstration as an operator's approval

In 2017 I approved a tray-handling design after a demonstration organised around people responsible for purchasing our equipment.

The full account

II

Twelve possible applications did not make a twelve-application release

In 2022 our proposed product language described a broad set of crop-and-application combinations for a solar-assisted drying cabinet.

The full account

III

Forty-five interviews represented three responsibilities, not one vote

In 2023 we conducted forty-five interviews around the next product experience: fifteen purchaser-sponsors, fifteen operators and fifteen produce buyers.

The full account

In the words of others

Trusted by those who appoint.

In this fictional account, Merenla made the product's surrounding commitments visible. She separated a useful buyer introduction from an offtake promise, even though the broader proposition would have been easier to present as a complete business opportunity.
Imran VezqomriFictional CEO and current manager, Lemqavri Thermal Products
This invented observation reflects my product-research relationship with Merenla. She accepted that a purchaser-led demonstration had arrived before adequate operator evidence, retained responsibility for that choice and changed the development inquiry instead of asking the users to explain away the difference.
Ruth DeqzavthiFictional product-research colleague, Lemqavri Thermal Products

The journal

Perspective, set down with care.

An invitation

Contact

Product-development discussions and a possible first outside contribution where the purchaser's promise needs closer examination.

Open to
  • Board appointments
  • Advisory roles
  • Speaking invitations

office@merenlazaqverthi.example