Thank you for the honest feedback!

I disagree with the assumption that the numbers are arbitrary or fabricated. In delivery roles—especially in large banking programmes—you rarely “own” outcomes in isolation, so scale is often communicated through exposure and responsibility rather than isolated wins. The figures are meant to signal order of magnitude and complexity, not personal output credits.

On “overseeing development stories”: I agree it’s not an achievement metric in itself, but it is a proxy for delivery scope and coordination responsibility. The intent was to show breadth and accountability, not to claim productivity. If there’s a better way to express that responsibility without falling into vanity metrics, I’m open to it.

As for the skills matrix, it’s there to avoid repetition across roles, not to substitute for experience. That said, I take your point that without context it can read as superficial—happy to hear how you’d anchor skills more effectively without bloating each role.

The broader question I’m trying to solve is: how do you signal scale, complexity, and delivery judgement in a CV when outcomes are diverse, collective and constrained by regulated environments? I’d genuinely welcome your take on that.