Leader Spotlight: What it takes to lead a high-stakes product transformation, with Hazar Adler

Hazar Adler is Senior Director of Product – Checkout at Payoneer, where she’s leading a global transformation of the product. With nearly a decade in fintech, she’s held senior roles across payments, onboarding, and product operations. Before this, she led Payoneer’s core payments team and helped shape strategy at optile.

In our conversation, Hazar talks about driving a big checkout transformation by balancing business needs with product challenges. She shares how teaming up with partners, clear communication, and empathy helped her remote teams stay aligned and motivated. Hazar also dives into handling the politics of change, rebuilding trust, and juggling legacy systems with new innovations, all while keeping the customer front and center.

---

Why transform the Checkout product?

You're in the middle of a major transformation of the Checkout product at Payoneer. What prompted the shift?

The transformation was driven by both business needs and product limitations. Our initial solution wasn’t as profitable as we needed it to be, and from a product standpoint, it lacked the flexibility and scalability required to serve our global merchant base. We needed to move faster, expand to more regions, and support more complex requirements.

This shift also aligns closely with Payoneer's strategy to rely more on partner ecosystems. We're building a network of partners that can provide our merchants with more capabilities and features. That strategic leap opens up scalability. We can support more jurisdictions and enable faster time to revenue.

Another thing to note is that the Checkout space is a very saturated market. We’re not in a niche, and there are a lot of providers out there. That’s why our product positioning is key. We focus on cross-border merchants selling globally. Initially, we focused mainly on Hong Kong, but we quickly realized there was demand far beyond that. We just weren’t moving fast enough, which is what ultimately drove the transformation.

What led you to the strategy to lean more heavily on partners?

It made sense to leverage best-in-class partners who could help us unlock more markets faster and widen our offering more quickly. If I were to compare the first and second versions of the solution — the first was built entirely in-house, while the second uses an existing partner solution tailored to our needs. So there’s still investment required, but it’s a different scale and a different velocity.

Aligning internal teams and external partners

When you have a product vision and you're working with partners, how do you align internal teams with external partner roadmaps?

Once we decide to leverage a partner, we have to accept certain limitations. But it always comes down to business needs. For example, flexible pricing is a critical requirement for us; it’s key to the success of the new solution. Our partner doesn’t offer that level of flexibility, so we’re building it in-house to fill the gap.

No partner will check every box. You have to prioritize and focus on what’s most important. That’s the timeless product recipe — ruthless prioritization.

You launched the pilot in 14 weeks. What helped you move at that pace without sacrificing quality or burning out your team?

It was a massive transformation and quite a radical one. Normally, you’d start small, prove the concept, and scale. We didn’t have that luxury. We restructured the entire team. So first and foremost, empathy was key, especially from leadership. Change isn’t easy. People react differently, and there’s always an adjustment period.

Clear goals and milestones helped the team stay focused. We gave them the space to execute, but leadership stayed closely involved — micro-interested, not micromanaging. Our team had more of a startup mindset, and in that setup, leaders can’t sit in an ivory tower. You need to be hands-on and supportive.

There's a very thin line between micromanaging and hand-holding the team, and during major change, support matters. You need to stay close to the details that matter and always stay focused on the customer. Balance what the team can achieve with what the customer truly needs.

We also prioritized team health with regular check-ins, engagement tracking, and communication. Since we’re fully remote, we made a point to bring everyone together in person. That really helped. And we stayed out of day-to-day decisions unless absolutely necessary. We were there to guide, not control.

You mentioned being micro-interested rather than a micro-manager. What have you learned about striking that balance when unifying a global remote team?

This goes beyond product. It’s really about stakeholder management. In our case, our key GTM teams are in China and APAC, while our product teams are in Germany. So communication is everything.

Emails and chat are fine, but they’re not enough. You need face time. We set up weekly office hours with product and GTM teams, which really improved alignment.

In the past, there were lots of misunderstandings between different timelines and expectations. There was a trust issue at some point too, partly due to delivery delays. That broke trust with the GTM side. Constant communication helped rebuild that. Over-communicating is fine; you're doing the right thing when you do that.

Navigating politics and challenges of transformation

In your career, you've led transformation at many levels, through acquisition, market expansion, and product reinvention. What have you learned about the politics of transformation?

Transformation always creates tension. There's tension between old and new, risk and speed, local and global. You can’t avoid politics, no matter the size of your organization.

First, you need C-level buy-in. If you don't have that buy-in, the transformation won’t succeed. You need something to back you up, whatever story you're trying to sell. As soon as you get the buy-in, you have to understand that the clock starts ticking. You have maybe three to six months to show results. And that’s not much time.

You also need courage to move forward despite ambiguity. You won’t have all the answers. In our case, there were moments of deep uncertainty, like when we were still evaluating a potential partner. Maybe we’d decided internally they were the right fit, but we hadn’t engaged them formally yet. Still, we had to start planning as if it were happening. You need to make decisions without full clarity, be willing to get it wrong, and move quickly to course-correct when you do.

Sometimes that means taking unconventional bets and being prepared to prove them or pull the plug if needed. And no matter what, you have to stay customer-centric. At the end of the day, we build products to solve real problems for real people. That should always stay at the center.

I’ve also learned that resistance is a given. People will push back, especially when transformation touches org structures. It’s not easy. That’s where leadership matters most. You need to keep your leadership team close, but your direct reports even closer. Hear their concerns. Address them with facts and empathy. A lot of it comes down to communication, expectation-setting, and soft skills.

And as simple as it sounds, adaptability is everything. How easily you adjust to change and how well you help others do the same can make or break a transformation. Everyone responds to change differently, and it’s your job to lead them through it.

Overcoming trust issues and turning things around

Do you have any examples of a time when things felt hopeless but you managed to turn the situation around?

When you’ve been in an organization for a while and gone through multiple transformation projects, there’s usually a reason those transformations were needed. And often, trust is a big part of that.

One example that comes to mind is around the trust gap between product and tech teams and the GTM teams. There were instances where we couldn't deliver on promises, which directly impacted the ability of GTM to sell the product. And sometimes those delays weren’t even in our control. Maybe a partner wasn’t ready, or a contract took too long to finalize. But regardless of whose fault it was, the damage to trust was real.

So when we kicked off the transformation, we had a new leadership team owning the solution, but the same GTM teams were still involved — teams that had gone through the previous product's challenges. That created an internal trust issue and a lot of, “Why should we believe it’s different this time?”

To rebuild that trust, we knew we couldn’t just talk about change; we had to show it. We brought the GTM team closer, made sure communication was constant, and treated them like part of the core team. Not just stakeholders but true partners. If they couldn’t sell the product, that wasn’t their problem. It was our problem too. And third, we committed to following through on what we promised. Over time, that consistency shifted the dynamic. It took patience, but the relationship changed for the better.

More specifically, we worked hard to show we were truly in it together. That meant equipping them with the right narratives and involving them in ICP refinements. They’re the ones closest to the market, and they understand it better than we do. One challenge was that our product team didn’t speak the same language as many of our end users. Most of the merchants are based in China, and we don’t speak Chinese, but our GTM teams do. They became the translators, both literally and in terms of understanding local needs.

So we made sure to bring them into the process. We asked for their input, listened carefully to their feedback, especially when it came to merchant pushback, and adjusted based on what they were seeing. That kind of collaboration was key to turning things around.

Balancing legacy and new product priorities

How do you balance launching a new version of a product while maintaining and protecting a revenue-generating legacy product?

In our case, we couldn’t just pull the plug on the legacy system overnight. We had to keep the lights on while also planning a thoughtful transition. It’s not as dramatic as it sounds, but it does require a clear exit strategy. Our focus was on moving merchants from the legacy product to the new one as smoothly as possible. And honestly, it wasn’t just a migration. In many cases, it felt like we were reselling an entirely new product. While their core needs were similar, the way the new product served them was quite different.

We approached the balance on two fronts. First, there was the customer-facing side: being transparent with merchants about what to expect, what the new product would support, and what the transition would look like. Then there was the internal side: how we prioritized work across both products.

We made a clear decision not to build any new features for the legacy product. We only handled major bug fixes, and even then, we were selective. If an issue wasn’t critical, we let it go. In some cases, even if it risked losing a few merchants, we were okay with that. Our focus had to stay on the future, on the new product.

We didn’t have a separate team dedicated to the legacy product, so the same teams working on the new solution also had to maintain the old one. That meant we had to be really clear about priorities. We use an internal traffic light system to classify incidents. Anything that impacts all customers and all transactions, regardless of product, gets top priority. But beyond that, if a bug is critical but affects only a few merchants, we might accept that risk.

That’s where leadership buy-in is crucial. The C-level team understood that we had to shift focus and that the legacy product wouldn’t receive the same level of support. Their alignment made it possible to keep moving forward with confidence.

Advice on facing rapid, ambiguous transformation

Is there anything else you’d offer to product leaders stepping into a transformation where outcomes need to be delivered quickly and under ambiguity? Any specific guidance to help them succeed?

We’ve already touched on ambiguity, but I’ll say it again. Own it. Don’t wait for clarity; it’s not going to arrive on its own. You need to create it. That mindset shift is crucial.

Next, pick your battles. If you aim for perfection, you’ll fail. You won’t have the time or space to perfect everything, and honestly, not everything needs to be perfect. Sometimes “good enough” really is perfect, depending on the stage you’re in. Especially early on, whether it’s a pilot or MVP — be okay with compromise.

Empower a lean team. One of the biggest enablers for us was keeping teams small and cross-functional. That helped us move fast. Small doesn’t mean weak; it can mean agile, focused, and efficient. So empower the team, keep it lean, and let them drive momentum.

Communicate constantly, especially across functions. Transformation creates chaos, and if it touches the whole organization, not just the product team, communication becomes even more critical. Keep everyone aligned.

Also, celebrate and track small wins. Transformation is a long game, and it can take weeks before you see major results. Don’t wait for the big bang. Recognize progress along the way. It lifts morale and reminds the team that they’re making a difference.

And finally, care deeply, lead lightly. Be present, support your team, but don’t become a bottleneck. Product leaders are often the glue holding many moving pieces together, and during transformation, that pressure multiplies. It’s not just the company evolving; your PMs are transforming too. That’s a lot to carry.

One last thing, and I’ve said it a few times already, but it’s worth repeating. This work isn’t easy. But it can be incredibly exciting and deeply rewarding. It really comes down to mindset. What do you want out of this challenge? For me, the challenge itself is motivating. It pushes me to grow. And in today’s environment, with AI shifting priorities from growth to profitability, and constant external disruption, transformation is becoming more common. So, try to find the fun in it. If you don’t, it’ll just burn you out.