About
Experience & Education
Volunteer Experience
-
Board Member, Trinity Board of Visitors
Duke University
- Present 2 years 9 months
Education
Advisory board for the deans of Trinity College of Arts & Sciences.
-
Board Member
Brooklyn Community Board 6
- Present 1 year 6 months
Social Services
General board member. Land Use, Landmarks, and Housing committee.
Languages
-
Chinese
Elementary proficiency
-
Spanish
Elementary proficiency
Other similar profiles
Explore more posts
-
Aung Pyae Phyo
I’ve learned the hard way: hustle doesn’t beat ambiguity—systems do. When I’m shipping in high-ambiguity environments (new product, shifting requirements, multiple stakeholders), I’ve found that “working harder” rarely fixes the chaos. What does help is treating delivery as three lightweight systems that reinforce each other: 1) Scope system (make the outcome explicit) A short PRD that answers: what problem are we solving, for whom, and how will we know it worked? If the success metric isn’t written down, you end up debating opinions instead of iterating on evidence. 2) Execution system (make progress cheap) A single source of truth backlog with epics → small tickets → clear acceptance criteria. My rule: if it isn’t in the backlog with an owner and a date/sprint, it doesn’t exist. That’s how you avoid “verbal tasks” and quiet drops across parallel workstreams. 3) Quality system (make “done” real) “Done” isn’t “merged.” It’s: acceptance criteria met, edge cases considered, observability in place, and a clear path for rollback/triage if something goes sideways. Quality gates don’t slow teams down—lack of them does, because rework and production thrash are the real velocity killers. None of these systems are heavy. But together, they turn ambiguity into a repeatable loop: define → ship → observe → learn. Curious: what’s the simplest system you’ve seen that keeps teams shipping without losing quality?
Explore top content on LinkedIn
Find curated posts and insights for relevant topics all in one place.
View top content