Reinforced Product Ownership of Exit Criteria

Situation

Engineering unilaterally removed the NVIDIA CUDA toolkit requirement from RLC Pro 9.6 LTS exit criteria, citing lack of automation. Peter clarified in the Brian/Brady sync that Product owns exit criteria and prioritization, Engineering owns the solution and date. When a requirement is challenged, Product asks When can you deliver it - not whether to include it.

Reasoning

Engineering removing exit criteria without Product sign-off breaks the org model Peter is building. If Engineering can unilaterally descope, Product loses its defining authority. The email forwarding the recording to Bjorn and Baek was deliberate signaling - Peter wants the product leadership team to understand and internalize this model. Connects to the systematic tightening of the prod/eng interface.

Additional Context

Triggered by specific violation: NVIDIA CUDA removed from RLC Pro 9.6 LTS exit criteria by engineering. Peter forwarded the Fathom recording of this meeting to Bjorn and Chris Baek with the note: to have clarity about how I am trying to structure the interface between prod/eng.

Observed Evidence

Fathom summary: Product owns exit criteria and prioritization. Engineering owns the solution and date. When a requirement is challenged, Products role is to ask When can you deliver it? not to debate the technical implementation. Email forwarding recording to Bjorn/Baek for transparency.

Matching Patterns

Confidence Breakdown

Reasoning Depth Analysis