Tomer London Publishes New Work – A Participant Spotlight

Start with Molly’s section to see how Tomer London frames participant voices; reflect on the practical choices behind each piece.

In the new work, the spotlight centers on conversations with a participant named molly, identifying how inputs shape each product. Tomer London traces the arc from the initial concept to the actual outputs, calling out the moments that mattered most during editing. The covid context informs pacing, with timelines adjusted to accommodate remote collaboration.

The report delivers concrete data: three interviews, twelve field notes, and five final products showcased by the author. It highlights wells of detail from the participant’s responses and includes a section on taxes and budgeting to prevent overspend. When a schedule slips, the piece explains how small edits can tighten the narrative instead of rushing the frame, avoiding screwing up the coherence.

For teams copying this approach, focusing on two actionable steps: create a short, structured conversations log and build a simple decision sheet that captures tells from participants and actual decisions. seeing how phrases become guidance helps editors stay aligned; definitely keep milestones visible and share progress with the wider team. If readers are impatient, offer a quick highlight reel at the top and a deeper dive below to balance speed with depth; this structure helps you reflect identifying needs, calling out values, and producing clearer outcomes than wouldnt be possible with a vague draft.

What makes or breaks executive hires – A deep dive with Eeke de Milliano, Head of Global Product at Stripe

Begin with a concrete recommendation: require a 90-day plan plus a live case for each executive contender. Frame the scenario around Stripe-like delivery flows–covering shop entry, order proofs, and payouts in multiple currencies–then demand steps, milestones, and clear yardsticks for success that the new Head of Global Product would reach within 90 days.

Ask for a precise catalog of important actions, owners, and milestones for the first month, plus how the candidate would reveal insights from user data, analytics, and cross-functional input. Look for evidence that data guides decisions about experiences used by customers.

Errors to avoid include unclear ownership, misaligned metrics, and a drift toward flashy features that fail to address real friction in checkout and payouts.

People-centered leadership shows in how the candidate supports cross-functional squads–product, design, engineering, risk, payments, and legal–keeping pace with evolving decisions and mentoring junior teammates such as interns.

Eeke de Milliano’s view from Stripe centers on primary levers: setting a clear cadence for product work, shaping risk posture, and enabling teams to collaborate across geographies. She values previous work at early-stage firms and large organizations, and she looks for evidence of group work that yields tangible results.

In evaluations, watch how a candidate talks about users and real problems, not internal jargon. Some come from ventures, others from large platforms; compare whether they translate vague needs into concrete roadmaps and measurable outcomes.

The round of interviews matters: a cross-functional panel tests how a candidate handles tradeoffs and communicates a clear set of goals; avoid hiring misfits and ensure they can frame a plan that aligns with Stripe’s approach to growth and risk.

Closing note: a strong hire shows impact through proofs of purchase, reliable deployments, and a calm, team-centered approach that helps groups across regions deliver dependable features while reducing risk for users.

What defines a top-tier executive for Stripe’s Global Product

Hire a determined executive who combines direct, data-driven judgment with relentless customer focus. This person should feel the pulse of user needs, intuit insights from usage data, and convert signals into concrete bets that move revenue, reduce churn, and simplify the developer experience. They should have those around them know what matters most and how to prioritise it.

Structure decisions around outcomes, not processes. This leader collaborates with product, engineering, risk, and operations, aligning stakeholders and avoiding the guess that one grand plan fits all. They push decisions down to teams with clear success metrics and test hypotheses with small, fast experiments instead of large, risky bets. They monitor progress versus targets and adjust quickly, creating a sense of pace across the organisation, sometimes requiring quick pivots when data contradicts a plan.

They build a leadership model that scales: mentoring a diverse group of PMs, engineers, data scientists, and designers to be self-sufficient. This approach has been proven in pilots across regions. They have created clear career ladders and feedback loops that keep teams aligned, with regular phone check-ins to ensure momentum and personal accountability.

In payments, risk management matters: the top-tier executive defines guardrails that balance user experience with security, including how to handle withdrawals and insurance coverage for edge cases. They not only set policy but test it against real events and watch signals from support channels and even inaudible cues in conversations on facebook to spot blind spots before they bite.

They cultivate a culture where happy customers and efficient operators are the norm. When something crazy happens, they stay calm, document what worked, and move forward. They translate what happens into repeatable playbooks that lift execution across product, data, and customer success.

Learning from peers like everingham reinforces the value of direct feedback and a pragmatic stance. They translate lessons into observable outcomes: faster onboarding for merchants, quicker issue resolution, and smoother withdrawals processing, with a clear path to scale globally.

To make lasting impact, orient hiring and development toward people who can sustain momentum, make trade-offs with confidence, and pursue succeeding bets that are possible and compound over time. Build a recruiting bar that prioritises diverse backgrounds, strong communication on the phone, and a bias for action while maintaining a humane sense of accountability. The goal is not a single win but a team that can create consistent value for users and partners alike.

Signals during interviews that indicate long-term product leadership

Recommendation: Start with a concrete scenario: ask the candidate to describe a product initiative they led that spanned six quarters or more, detailing the opening problem, the version released, the metrics tracked, and the final outcome. Look for crisp articulation, structured causality, and a plan that survives through changes in leadership or market context.

Signal: they outline conversations with customers and stakeholders that go beyond guesses, name the domain, and show how insights translate into prioritization. They easily connect user needs to outcomes and cite specific data points to support their decisions.

Signal: they demonstrate a rule-based approach to prioritization and a willingness to test assumptions. They describe a test plan, success criteria, and how they would double down on high-impact bets when early signals show promise. They speak with confidence and avoid vague promises, giving a clear view of path to a higher impact.

Signal: they reveal process discipline inspired by gilbreth–streamlined workflows, measurable steps, and a surface that makes decisions transparent for the team. They stick to a light-touch governance version that travels across squads, and they articulate how you end a cycle and begin the next. They show resilience when trade-offs compress deadlines, selling a coherent narrative to stakeholders. Ends with a clear finish and a plan for the next opening.

Signal: they show cross-functional leadership; they sit at the table with design, engineering, data, and sales, guiding conversations to practical actions. They articulate constraints, risks, and milestones, and they keep those conversations productive without micromanaging. They answer with specifics, not generalities, and they emphasize collaboration rather than ego.

Signal: they demonstrate global awareness by referencing work with teams in Israel, illustrating coordination across time zones and cultures. They describe how they maintain focus on a unifying goal while respecting local contexts, which indicates fitness to lead long-term programs across markets.

Practical evaluation rubric for leadership, cross-functional impact, and delivery

Begin with a 0–5 rubric across three pillars: leadership, cross-functional impact, and delivery. Weight them 0.4, 0.3, and 0.3, and review within 90-day windows. This approach shapes the conversation around observable outcomes rather than gut feel and helps founders and teams align toward shared values.

Leadership: rate a leader on vision clarity, openness, coaching, and talent development. Starting with explicit anchors sets clear expectations. Define explicit behaviors for each score (0 = absent, 5 = transformative); e.g., a 5 shows clear priorities, frequent 1:1s, and documented development plans that raise the capability of their teams. When leaders demonstrate burning energy and inspiring progress with a concrete plan, you see big shifts sooner.

Cross-functional impact: assess how well the leader connects product, design, engineering, marketing, and operations. Use a 0–5 scale on consensus-building, information sharing, and decision speed. A score improves when the leader maintains a click list of decisions and keeps windows open for feedback from disparate squads.

Delivery: evaluate cadence, quality, risk management, and customer impact. Define 0–5 for on-time delivery within the planned window, defect rate under 2% in production, and adherence to product quality standards. A good delivery record reduces disappointed stakeholders and improves customer feel and product value.

Data and scoring method: pull data from project dashboards, peer reviews, stakeholder surveys, and product metrics. Compute a weighted total, and attach a short justification for each pillar. Create a single page that captures the evidence: a click list of notable actions, concrete outcomes, and links to window-documented results. Open the assessment to feedback to keep having momentum toward improvement. The feedback loop is shaped by concrete data, not anecdote alone. Use a single, only scorecard per review to avoid confusion.

Question prompts to drive clarity: What value did this leadership action create for their teams and customers? Are you proud of the progress, and if not, what would sooner move the needle? If you see open collaboration with banking partners and brands, your score should reflect it. To ensure relevance, filter evidence to the product that shaped user experience and value, чтобы keep the focus on real outcomes.

Practical notes: avoid overloading with popularity metrics; prioritize quality and sustainable impact. When a leader has shown past success in customer-focused brands, bring those examples forward. If the data shows a pattern of good cross-functional momentum, youre likely to be proud of the team’s progress and to publish a transparent score to stakeholders sooner. It took longer for teams to gain traction in some cycles, so adjust targets accordingly.

Definition of success: the rubric should be easy to apply, repeatable, and open to revision as teams and markets change. The goal is not to chase vanity metrics but to ensure product value reaches customers and founders feel confident in the delivery pipeline. Avoid becoming addicted to vanity metrics; instead, focus on tangible outcomes that move their product forward.

90-day ramp plan: milestones, expectations, and measurable outcomes

Begin with a 14-day onboarding sprint for each group, assign a dedicated buddy, and set a tight, visible plan. This creates room for faster alignment, reduces downtime, and keeps spending predictable. Use a shared progress board to watch milestones, gather feedback, and address questions quickly. Listen to their experience and adjust the plan based on their input, so their team actually delivers.

1. Days 1–14: Setup and baseline
   • Provide access to needed tools and data, deliver a copy of the onboarding checklist, and pair each participant with a buddy. Conduct 15-minute daily standups to watch progress and surface blockers.
   • Define 2–3 priorities for the ramp and approve a simple spending guideline to keep costs predictable.
   • Run a quick research sprint to identify blockers, capture initial insights, and sign off on the baseline plan.
2. Days 15–30: First deliverable and validation
   • Produce the first draft of the core artifact and present it to their groups; collect feedback and revise copy for clarity and quality.
   • Secure sign-off from the primary sponsor and establish clear acceptance criteria and success metrics; schedule a mid-point review.
   • Listen to stakeholder questions and resolve them within 24 hours to keep momentum and keep everyone aligned.
3. Days 31–60: Cross-functional project ownership
   • Lead a small cross-functional project with 2–4 peers; set shared milestones and publish a lightweight progress report weekly.
   • Onboard any additional teammates identified in the research; adjust roles as needed and track resource spending with a simple tracker.
   • Gather mid-term feedback, adjust the approach, and ensure outcomes align with the future plan and their expectations.
4. Days 61–90: End-to-end execution and future recommendations
   • Deliver the final artifact and demonstrate live outcomes; secure sign-off from key stakeholders and document learnings for future programs.
   • Publish a concise copy of the plan and results; share with broader groups and outline next steps and potential extensions.
   • Address lingering questions, close gaps, and assign owners for ongoing support to maintain velocity.

Expectations: move quickly, communicate clearly, and collaborate with their groups. Maintain high quality on every copy and deliverables, and keep questions and feedback visible in the weekly reviews. Ensure onboarding goes smoothly for each participant and that their experience stays positive as outcomes grow.

• Onboard completion within 14 days and buddy engagement guaranteed.
• First deliverable ready for review by day 30, with acceptance criteria met.
• Regular cross-functional collaboration, with weekly updates and timely responses to questions.
• Spending tracked against a simple plan; adjustments made before overruns occur.
• Participant experience improves over each milestone, evidenced by feedback scores and faster iterations.

Measurable outcomes: time-to-first-deliverable, quality score, stakeholder satisfaction, and budget adherence. By day 90, aim for a deliverable that meets all criteria, a clear plan for future work, and documented learnings that can be reused in subsequent cohorts.

Inclusion and bias checks in executive hiring: a concrete checklist

Begin with a bias-check rubric embedded in every stage of the executive-hiring cycle, aligned to the role’s ends and the company strategy.

1. Role definition and objective rubric: articulate 3–5 outcome criteria (revenue impact, leadership depth, strategic execution, culture add); assign weights and apply the same rubric to every candidate to ensure fair comparison. This finding helps teams focus on true requirements rather than pedigree; stanford case studies and simons, co-founder insights, support the value of outcome-driven criteria.
2. Job posting and description audit: scan for biased language and unnecessary prestige signals; replace with neutral, outcome-focused phrasing that invites diverse backgrounds. Track content changes and ensure postings invite candidates who reflect different brands and experiences–short, precise, and outcome-oriented.
3. Candidate screening and resourcing: redact names, photos, and school identifiers in the initial screening to reduce perceptual bias; rely on a standardized scorecard to move only truly qualified candidates to interviews. This round of screening should show a clear pattern of finding candidates who meet the rubric, not those who match a static profile.
4. Structured interview design: prepare a fixed set of questions tied to the rubric; require all interviewers to score responses against the same benchmarks; use a rating scale that surfaces differences in experience, impact, and approach. This round minimizes inaudible feedback and ensures every data point contributes to an informed reflect.
5. Diverse interview panels and governance: compose panels with diverse backgrounds across functions and geographies; mandate at least three reviewers per candidate and rotate chair roles to prevent single-minded momentum. Ensure panel voices reflect different brands and perspectives.
6. Sourcing and pipeline breadth: monitor applicant sources to prevent pool homogeneity; aim for three-quarters of candidates coming from at least three distinct channels (network referrals, open postings, and targeted outreach). This approach gives a wider view of capability and reduces sudden skew in the candidate mix.
7. Reference and experience verification: conduct structured reference checks focused on disclosed outcomes and leadership behavior; corroborate claims with documented results and measurable impacts. This step sheds light on what the candidate has truly achieved and returns insight to the decision team.
8. Bias and language audits in evaluation notes: require evaluators to flag language that signals bias or unrealistic expectations; store notes in a shared, accessible format and review for consistency across candidates. If notes contain inaudible gaps, request clarification before the final round.
9. Compensation and offer governance: benchmark offers against market data and internal parity, ensuring consistency across candidates with similar scope and scope of responsibility. Document the rationale for any deviation to prevent hidden bias from shaping the end decision.
10. Debrief, reflection, and accountability: hold a concise post-round debrief to compare rubric scores with outcomes and capture any change needed in the process. Spend a short time reflecting on what worked, what didn’t, and what to adjust for the next cycle; the goal is continuous improvement, not a single event.

According to ongoing practice, a truly effective checklist yields returns by reducing friction, shortening cycle times, and improving retention of executives who fit the culture and strategy. The approach has been refined through real-world experience–the change begins with clear criteria, deliberate reflection, and a transparent alignment between candidates’ experience and the brand’s needs. It gives teams a practical path to move beyond instinct, with content that supports fair evaluation and a stronger, more inclusive executive bench.