This job is closed
Applications are no longer available for this announcement. Explore current related opportunities below.
Job description
Compensation: Approximately $150,000 base + performance-based upside
Reports to: CEO
Works closely with: Chief Architect / CTO
The Opportunity
DiversyFund is evolving from a real estate investment platform into an AI-native technology and investment company. We have spent years building proprietary technology, AI capabilities, investor infrastructure, operating data, and internal systems. We have a highly capable technical architect and a clear product vision.
Our next challenge is different:
We need to turn technical intelligence into a scalable engineering organization.
We are looking for a hands-on Head of Technology Execution who combines strong technical fluency with exceptional process discipline, engineering management, urgency, and execution.
This is not a traditional CIO position.
It is not a project manager position.
It is not a consulting or advisory position.
And it is definitely not a job for someone whose answer to every problem is another meeting.
We need someone who can walk into a complex technical environment, understand what has been built, extract institutional knowledge from key technical people, organize it, establish priorities and ownership, build the engineering team, and drive projects through production.
Your Mission
Your mission is simple:
Build the engineering machine around our technical vision.
Our Chief Architect should be spending the majority of his time solving difficult technical problems, architecting systems, advancing AI capabilities, and building differentiated technology.
Your job is to create the organization around him that allows that to happen.
You will turn:
The CEO should not have to chase technology projects.
The Chief Architect should not be the sole repository of technical knowledge.
And shipped technology should not depend upon one individual knowing how everything works.
What You Will Own
You will own technology execution across five interconnected areas: engineering delivery, technical process, team development, institutional knowledge, and operational resilience.
You will create and maintain one clear technology roadmap showing what we're building, why we're building it, who owns it, dependencies, committed dates, current status, risks, and objective definitions of completion.
You will establish a lightweight engineering cadence that produces speed rather than bureaucracy. Every significant workstream should have a clear owner, deliverable and date. Problems should surface before deadlines are missed—not afterward.
You will drive projects all the way from “we built it” to “it works in production.” That includes testing, deployment, monitoring, adoption, documentation, and post-release verification. This build-to-production responsibility is central to the role and carries forward an explicit requirement of our current technology operating model.
You will also help recruit, onboard and lead additional engineers as we expand the internal team.
One of your first assignments will be reducing technical dependency on any single individual.
That means creating institutional knowledge around:
Source-code repositories
Infrastructure
Databases and data flows
APIs and integrations
AI systems and agents
Credentials and access
Product roadmap
Open technical issues
Runbooks and recovery procedures
We are not looking to diminish the importance of our strongest technical people.
We want increase their leverage .
Our best architects should architect.
Our best builders should build.
The organization around them should make their knowledge scalable.
You Need to Be Technical
This is where we will be unusually selective.
You don't necessarily need to be the strongest programmer in the company, but you need enough technical depth to independently understand what our engineers are telling you.
If an engineer explains an infrastructure problem, API limitation, database bottleneck, architectural trade-off, deployment failure, model problem, or integration dependency, your immediate reaction cannot be:
“Let's schedule another meeting.”
You need to understand enough to ask the next three intelligent questions.
Strong candidates may have previously been:
Technical founders
Heads of Engineering
VPs of Engineering at smaller companies
Principal or Staff Engineers who moved into leadership
Technical Program Leaders with genuine software-engineering backgrounds
CTOs of early-stage companies who discovered they were exceptional at execution and team building
Previous hands-on software engineering experience is strongly preferred.
Process Must Be Natural to You
We do not want someone who needs to be taught why process matters.
You should naturally think:
What are we solving? Who owns it? What's blocking it? What's the deliverable? When will it ship? How do we know it works? Where is it documented?
But we're equally uninterested in corporate bureaucracy.
If you need ten recurring meetings, six committees, a 40-page policy manual and three layers of approvals to ship software, this isn't the right environment.
We want minimum process required for maximum velocity.
Build the Team
You will help determine the technical organization required for the next stage of the company.
Initially, we expect to add senior engineering capacity around our existing technical leadership.
Potential capabilities include:
Senior AI/Product Engineering, full-stack engineering, data engineering, infrastructure/DevOps, QA and eventually additional engineering leadership.
You will participate directly in recruiting and technical evaluation.
We are also evaluating strategic acquisitions of smaller technology companies and engineering teams. The right person may participate in technical diligence and the integration of an acquired engineering organization.
Build vs. Buy
We don't believe everything should be built internally.
You should be comfortable asking:
Should we build this, buy it, integrate it, outsource it, or acquire the capability?
Speed matters.
A commercially available solution that gets us to market in three weeks may be superior to a technically elegant internal solution that takes six months.
At the same time, technology that creates genuine competitive differentiation should remain proprietary.
We expect you to understand the difference.
First 90 Days
Your initial mission will be aggressive but straightforward.
Within the first 30 days, we expect you to understand and map the entire technology environment, establish the technology source of truth, identify key-person dependencies, understand every significant active project, establish clear owners and dates, identify critical engineering gaps, and create an actionable roadmap.
By approximately Day 60, we expect a functioning engineering delivery cadence, meaningful reduction in technical knowledge concentration, stronger documentation, clearer build-to-production practices, improved QA/release discipline, and additional engineering capacity moving through recruiting.
By Day 90, we expect technology execution to operate increasingly as a system rather than a collection of individuals .
The CEO should have materially greater visibility while spending materially less time chasing technology projects.
How We'll Measure You
Your performance will not primarily be measured by hours worked, meetings attended, presentations created, or how sophisticated your project-management system looks.
We'll look at outcomes:
Are we shipping faster?
Do we know when things will ship?
Is our engineering team growing?
Is technical knowledge becoming institutional knowledge?
Are fewer systems dependent upon one individual?
Can leadership understand technology status without chasing people?
Are engineers spending more time building and less time coordinating?
Is the product getting into customers' hands?
Those are the metrics that matter.
What Will Make You Successful Here
You are unusually effective at converting ambiguity into action.
You are technically credible but not intellectually precious.
You can work with brilliant technical people without either micromanaging them or becoming dependent upon them.
You document things because you naturally understand that undocumented knowledge is organizational risk.
You are comfortable saying:
“Friday is at risk. Here’s why. Here are our three options. I recommend option two. I need a decision by noon.”
You don't wait until Friday to announce that Friday's deadline won't happen.
You don't need the CEO to remind you three times.
You follow through.
What Will Not Work Here
This position will be frustrating for someone who:
Prefers advisory work over execution
Needs highly structured corporate environments
Cannot understand technical architecture
Confuses activity with output
Creates process for the sake of process
Is primarily a PowerPoint/project-management executive
Waits for perfect information before acting
Cannot operate comfortably in an entrepreneurial environment
About the Environment
We are building while operating a real business.
Things will change.
Priorities will move.
Some systems are mature. Others are being rebuilt. Some should probably be replaced entirely.
You will have direct access to the CEO and technical leadership and substantial influence over how the technology organization develops.
“Before I begin, I need six weeks to assess the organization.”
The Person We’re Looking For:
If you've built engineering teams, shipped complex software, reduced dependence on key technical individuals, and turned chaotic technical environments into
#J-18808-Ljbffr
Worksite address
san diego, CA, 92189, US
Who can apply
Review the original listing for work authorization, qualifications and employer requirements.