went through GitHub's TPM loop early 2026. got the role. sharing because TPM interview prep resources for GitHub specifically are basically nonexistent and i spent a lot of time prepping in the dark.
i have 9 years of TPM / program management in developer tools. that context matters for how they calibrate the technical depth they expect.
the process: recruiter screen: 30 min, background + motivation. they asked why TPM vs PM or EM, which is actually a real question you should have a thoughtful answer to. technical screen: 45 min. one-on-one with a senior engineer. we talked through a real architectural problem: how would you manage a multi-team migration of a core service (they gave me a fictional but realistic scenario about migrating a monolith service that other internal teams depend on). they wanted me to walk through how i'd sequence it, identify dependencies, handle rollbacks, and communicate risk upward. behavioral panel: 3 x 45 min rounds. round 1: project complexity. 'tell me about the largest cross-functional program you've run, what broke, how you fixed it.' round 2: stakeholder management. a lot of 'how have you handled a situation where two teams had incompatible timelines' and 'how do you make decisions when you don't have authority.' round 3: github-specific. more about product understanding. 'how does GitHub make money, what do you think is the most important metric for Copilot' type questions. this one surprised me a bit. systems / technical depth: a separate 60 min round with a principal engineer. we went deep on CI/CD pipeline architecture, distributed build systems, and scaling problems. they wanted to see i could hold a technical conversation with an eng lead, not just run the meeting.
what made the difference: the technical depth round is real. this is not 'can you follow along in an eng meeting.' they expect you to have opinions. i came in with specific knowledge about GitHub Actions architecture, where bottlenecks appear at scale, and how monorepo tooling interacts with CI. that landed.