Extend Karl Lowenbjer under Wallace and land Atlas and Motherbrain in Engineering

September 7, 2026 at 4:55 PMpeoplemedium

Situation

After spending the prior week reading the Motherbrain and Atlas code Karl Lowenbjer built under Tabatha, Peter concluded it was quite good - really well architected and thought through. Chris Baek did not want to keep Karl on the Operations side. In the Thursday 1:1 Peter pitched Wallace directly on taking both the contractor and the applications, telling him he is pretty sure Wallace ends up being the one asked to maintain things like Motherbrain and Atlas anyway. Wallace agreed the same call, having independently run a compliance and security read of the code and landed in the same place. On Saturday Peter DMed Karl himself, told him his contract ends in about a week and a half, and asked whether he wanted to let it end or extend it under Peter - then asked Sarah for 30 minutes with Karl on Tuesday or Wednesday to work it out.

Reasoning

The applications are compliance-adjacent and were about to be orphaned by a departure, and there was no other candidate owner - as Wallace put it, he had seen no reason not to extend him. Peter judged the asset on its engineering merits rather than on where it came from, and treated keeping the builder attached to the thing he built as the cheap way to keep it alive. Going direct to Karl himself, on a weekend, ahead of the Baek conversation, reflects that the contract end date is the binding constraint - roughly 9/17 - and the risk is losing the person before the org question is settled.

Additional Context

Wallace flagged a limit while agreeing: he does not want to set a precedent that all internally developed apps outside engineering roll under him without help. That is a boundary on the placement, not a rejection of it. There is an existing open todo - see if we can move Karl under Wallace - carrying Baek as delegate.

Observed Evidence

Wallace: I think it makes sense because it is compliancy adjacent ... I have no issue with Carl or taking him on. I have concern with departments outside of engineering creating apps in general and those getting thrown over the wall. / Wallace: Carl did say his contract was up the 17th. / Peter: Yep, it is soon. ... I agree. I will talk to Chris Baek.

Confidence Breakdown

34/35
Evidence
16/30
Pattern
20/20
Source
15/15
Corroboration

Reasoning Depth Analysis

Org Signal:Engineering will absorb well-built systems from other departments rather than let them die with the author - but Wallace named the limit out loud and Peter did not contest it.
Who Affected:Chris Baek, who loses the contractor from Operations; Bjorn Hovland and RevOps, who depend on Atlas and Motherbrain for board and forecasting work during the Tabatha transition.
Precedent:Judge an inherited internal app on its architecture, and if it survives that, keep the person who built it. Also the counter-precedent Wallace flagged: this is not a standing rule that non-engineering apps land on him unaided.
Consequences:Real - a contract that would otherwise lapse around 9/17, plus a reporting-line change.
Timing:Now because the contract end date is roughly ten days out and Baek had already declined; going direct to Karl on a Saturday buys time to settle the org question.

Source

reflection

AI Confidence

85%

Related Context

🎥
Steve <> Peter Weekly 1:1

fathom

Chris Baek does not want Karl, that contractor under Tabatha. If you do, I am pretty impressed with what he built. I am pretty sure you are going to end up being the one that we asked to maintain things like Motherbrain and Atlas.

💬
DM with Karl Lowenbjer

slack

Hi Karl, it looks like your contract is coming up for an end in a week and a half or so. Do you want to allow it to end, or would you rather extend it under me?

💬
DM with Sarah Almaraz

slack

On Tuesday or Wednesday, can I get 30 mintues with Karl Lowenbjer to chat about extending his contract?

Outcome

No outcome recorded yet.

Decision ID: 12c8d051-a8e6-4ef8-bf23-bcd6ea94714e