Scribd
Upload
7 views

Platforms Program Manager Case Study 20250212 (1)

The document outlines a case study for launching an enterprise SaaS project focused on developing a GDPR/CCPA-compliant audit automation platform within 12 weeks. It details the project phases, including technical planning, core system development, bug management, progress tracking, and risk management, along with specific tasks and deliverables for each phase. The project involves a diverse team and a robust tech stack, emphasizing the importance of technical precision and effective problem-solving throughout the process.

Uploaded by

sarath.uppuluri
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
7 views

Platforms Program Manager Case Study 20250212 (1)

The document outlines a case study for launching an enterprise SaaS project focused on developing a GDPR/CCPA-compliant audit automation platform within 12 weeks. It details the project phases, including technical planning, core system development, bug management, progress tracking, and risk management, along with specific tasks and deliverables for each phase. The project involves a diverse team and a robust tech stack, emphasizing the importance of technical precision and effective problem-solving throughout the process.

Uploaded by

sarath.uppuluri
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 6

Enterprise SaaS Launch: Technical

Project Manager Case Study


Timeframe: 8-10 hours
Deliverables:

1. Technical roadmap (10 pages max)


2. Dependency/risk matrix
3. Progress tracking plan (metrics/KPIs)
4. 15-minute presentation

Project Overview
Goal: Build a GDPR/CCPA-compliant audit automation platform for Fortune 500 clients in 12 weeks.
Team:

● 8 Developers (4 Backend, 2 Frontend, 2 DevOps)


● 3 QA Engineers, 1 SecOps, 1 UX Designer
Tech Stack:
● Kubernetes, Kafka, React/Typescript, AWS RDS (PostgreSQL), Terraform, Istio,
OpenTelemetry

Phase 1: Technical Planning & Architecture (2 hours)


Tasks:

1. Microservices Design
○ Split monolith into 5 services: Auth, Data Ingestion, Compliance Engine, Reporting,
Notifications.
○ Justify using gRPC vs REST for inter-service communication.
2. Database Optimization
○ Design sharding strategy for audit logs (time-based vs tenant-based).
○ Configure PostgreSQL connection pooling (PgBouncer).
3. Security
○ Implement OAuth2.0 with JWT and PKCE for frontend clients.
○ Integrate HashiCorp Vault for secrets management.

Deliverable: Architecture Decision Record (ADR) template with diagrams.


Phase 2: Sprint 1 – Core Systems (3 hours)
Technical Tasks (30+ Items):

Module Tasks

Backend 1. Kafka consumer/producer setup for audit log


streaming.
2. Idempotent API design for data ingestion.
3. Rate limiting (Redis + Lua scripts).

Frontend 1. Policy rule builder (drag-and-drop UI with


React Flow).
2. Audit trail visualization (D3.js heatmaps).

DevOps 1. Terraform AWS EKS cluster with autoscaling.


2. Istio ingress gateway for API routing.

Security 1. Static code analysis (SonarQube + Snyk).


2. Vault dynamic database credentials.

Testing 1. GDPR synthetic data generator (Python


Faker).
2. Chaos test Kafka broker failover.

Constraints:

● Only 2 DevOps engineers (1 junior).


● Frontend team has no D3.js experience.

Phase 3: Day 4 – Critical Bugs


Unexpected Issues:

1. Bug #1: PostgreSQL deadlocks under 1k concurrent users (found during load testing).
2. Bug #2: OAuth2.0 token leakage via misconfigured CORS in Istio.
3. Bug #3: AWS DMS migration failing for Oracle BLOB fields.
Task:

● Triage bugs using severity/impact matrix.


● Propose hotfixes without delaying sprint deadlines.

Phase 4: Progress Tracking & Metrics (1 hour)


KPIs to Define:

1. Developer Productivity:
○ Cycle time (Jira ticket commit → deploy).
○ Pull request review latency.
2. System Health:
○ Kafka lag (avg ms).
○ PostgreSQL query latency (P99).
3. QA Efficiency:
○ Defect escape rate (bugs found post-release).
○ Test automation coverage (%).

Task:

● Build a dashboard (mockup) tracking 3 metrics above using Grafana/QuickSight.


● Script a Slack bot alert for SLA breaches (e.g., Kafka lag > 5s).

Phase 5: Dependency & Risk Management (2 hours)


Critical Dependencies:

Task Blocks Owner Mitigation

SOC 2 Audit Prep Pen test SecOp Hire third-party auditor for parallel
completion s review.

Legacy Data AWS DMS DevOp Run nightly dry-run migrations.


Cutover validation s

Risks:

1. Third-party API rate limits (500req/min) bottlenecking compliance checks.


2. Kubernetes cluster autoscaling too slow for traffic spikes.
Deliverable: Risk matrix with RAG status (Red/Amber/Green).

Phase 6: Final Review (1 hour)


Task:

1. Write a 1-page post-mortem for Day 4 bugs.


2. Draft a 5-slide exec summary for the CTO showing:
○ Progress vs. timeline
○ Remaining critical path items
○ Team bandwidth utilization
Submission Guidelines

1. Format: Google Doc with tables/diagrams.


2. Required Sections:
○ Architecture diagrams (microservices, data flow).
○ Sprint plan with resource allocation (developers ↔ tasks).
○ Day 4 bug triage log (severity, solution, owner).
3. Presentation: Explain your approach to measuring productivity.

1. Scope & Focus


● Technical Depth > Fluff: We value specific tools, code snippets, and architectural
patterns over generic advice. Example:
○ ❌ Bad: “Improve testing.”
○ ✅ Good: “Implement 80% test automation coverage using Cypress for
frontend and pytest for backend; run nightly in GitHub Actions.”
● Prioritize Ruthlessly: If you try to solve everything, you’ll solve nothing. Explain
your trade-offs.

2. Deliverable Requirements
● Document Format:
○ 10 pages max (Google Doc/PDF).
○ Use tables, bullet points, and diagrams (e.g., sequence diagrams for API
flows).
○ Label sections clearly (e.g., “Phase 3: Day 4 Bug Triage”).
● Video: 15 mins max. No rehearsed pitches – walk us through your hardest
decision.

3. Evaluation Criteria
We’ll grade you on:
1. Technical Precision: Specific tools, code/architecture examples, metrics.
2. Bottleneck Solving: How you unblock teams (e.g., “Pair junior DevOps with
backend to Terraform”).
3. Conciseness: No filler. Use appendices for supporting details.
4. Error-Spotting: Did you catch all Day 4 bugs?

You might also like