Job Opportunities API

The Public Ledger of Openings

← Back to the ledger

Staff Engineer (gn) - AI Enablement

The Quality Group
CompanyThe Quality Group
CategoryEngineering
LocationDeutschland
RemoteRemote
EmploymentNot stated
LevelLead
SalaryNot stated by the employer
Posted16 Apr 2026
Last verified7 Aug 2026
SourceEmployer ATS (greenhouse)
Applications are handled by the employer, not by us.Apply on the employer's site →
Description
Start: Immediately | Level: Staff | Location: remote, Germany | Working Hours: Full Time (40h/week) Your next step in the Tech & Engineering team at ESN & More.   As Staff Engineer (gn) – AI Enablement , you will close the gap between AI potential and engineering reality. We have the platform, the tools, and the ambition – what we need is the person who sees where AI is changing how we build, drives that change without being asked, and makes it stick across teams. You work hands-on across our engineering organisation – enabling engineers to think and build with AI, leading our AI Community of Practice, and accelerating the shift to agent-driven workflows. This is not a consulting role and it's not a ticket queue. You don't wait to be pointed at a problem. You find it, frame it, and start moving. If you thrive on proactively identifying opportunities, moving teams forward through expertise rather than authority, and turning AI from a tool into a fundamental shift in how engineering works – this role is for you. To ensure smooth collaboration, we require a current primary residence in Germany for this position. Your mission You identify AI opportunities across engineering before they appear on anyone's roadmap – and you drive them forward proactively, with or without a formal mandate You lead our AI Community of Practice: you own the format, the cadence, the reusable playbooks and prompt libraries, and you measure whether engineers are actually working differently because of it You accelerate the shift to agentic engineering by working hands-on with Claude Code, Codex, and n8n – building prototypes, sharing patterns, and helping teams move from AI-assisted to AI-driven workflows You build reusable frameworks and experiment templates that multiply your impact: guides, decision frameworks, and best practices others can follow and improve on without needing you in the room You co-shape AI strategy together with the Heads of Engineering and VP of Engineering – you are a key voice grounded in what's technically feasible and what engineers actually need, and you proactively surface the problems worth solving You collaborate closely with our Cloud & Security team, which owns our enterprise AI platform (Codex and Claude Code via GDP Enterprise), to enable teams to use it well and to feed back what's missing You work as part of a Staff Engineer team with different specialisations – you challenge each other, support across domains, and contribute your AI depth as the specialisation the team is currently missing Your experience & skills You are currently working at Staff level or equivalent and have demonstrable cross-team impact – not just within your own squad You have solid, working knowledge of the modern AI toolkit – LLMs, prompt engineering, agentic frameworks, RAG, embeddings, and automation patterns – and you know when and why to use each. You don't need to have built all of it from scratch; you need the judgment to guide others through it and the credibility to be taken seriously when you do Your personal AI practice is real: you use tools like Claude Code, Cursor, or Copilot not because you have to – because you can't imagine not using them. You've built workflows, pushed the limits, broken things, and learned from it. You can show your work You have concrete experience enabling others: workshops, communities, documentation or guides that changed how a team actually works – you've moved people, not just written about moving them Communication is one of your strongest skills: you explain complex AI concepts clearly to sceptical senior engineers, overwhelmed teams, and leadership who need the trade-offs without the implementation details You know when AI is the wrong answer – you can make the case for keeping something deterministic, for stopping an experiment early, an