The train of thoughts is splendid.. simple to follow and everything rolling up to NS metric and pain points makes this a good example. Little flow how the answer for a Product Revamp question was answered - > Clarify vision (not explicitly done, but am adding this as an additional point here) > Confirm North Star Metrics - give 3 options(giving options is additional point I have added), choose 1 to move on > Possible market segment - regional, profile - give 3 options, choose 1 to move on > Possible user personas - give 3 or more options, choose 1(or 2) based on maximizing target > What are the pain points of those personas - give 3 or more options > What are the possible solutions to solve those pain points, keeping in mind about the NS metrics.
Immensely helpful content. I appreciate the way she started listing down what a good product would do and exactly the opposite would be a badly designed product. Really helps a lot
I think that opting for the bot would have been a good product to launch considering the 6 month timeline. Also because data derived from those entries can better inform the team on how to later develop the camera sensor if they decided to save that product idea for a later launch.
At the outset, the interviewer posed a seemingly simple and straightforward question. How is an interviewee expected to discern the need to structure their response in a complex manner? The setup felt awkward and didn't flow naturally. Even though I was aware in advance of the session's focus and know this is the standard structure but just not how people would respond naturally. I found myself inclined to respond quickly with a example (to her question, tell me a product you consider poorly designed), rather than (sounds like) challenging the interviewer on the clarity of her question. If this is indeed an issue, where does the responsibility lie, with the interviewer or the interviewee, or is it simply my perception? Love you know your thoughts.
I didn't think this response was that good. It just seemed like there was a ton of confirmation bias. Then again, it's hard to translate PMing workflow into a short interview
i think it’s less about the quality of the solution and more about the thinking of how you got there. the question inherently requires you do go off personal experience. definitely confirmation bias but in a real pm role you’d likely do mkt research and user interviews vs just going off of personal experience
I actually think the answer for which product wasn't good. MyFitnessPal caters to a specific audience but I wouldn't say its a bad product experience. So many "like" in how she speak.
Make sure you're interview-ready with Exponent's PM interview prep course: bit.ly/45IVoVD
The train of thoughts is splendid.. simple to follow and everything rolling up to NS metric and pain points makes this a good example.
Little flow how the answer for a Product Revamp question was answered -
> Clarify vision (not explicitly done, but am adding this as an additional point here)
> Confirm North Star Metrics - give 3 options(giving options is additional point I have added), choose 1 to move on
> Possible market segment - regional, profile - give 3 options, choose 1 to move on
> Possible user personas - give 3 or more options, choose 1(or 2) based on maximizing target
> What are the pain points of those personas - give 3 or more options
> What are the possible solutions to solve those pain points, keeping in mind about the NS metrics.
Immensely helpful content. I appreciate the way she started listing down what a good product would do and exactly the opposite would be a badly designed product. Really helps a lot
I think that opting for the bot would have been a good product to launch considering the 6 month timeline. Also because data derived from those entries can better inform the team on how to later develop the camera sensor if they decided to save that product idea for a later launch.
At the outset, the interviewer posed a seemingly simple and straightforward question. How is an interviewee expected to discern the need to structure their response in a complex manner? The setup felt awkward and didn't flow naturally. Even though I was aware in advance of the session's focus and know this is the standard structure but just not how people would respond naturally. I found myself inclined to respond quickly with a example (to her question, tell me a product you consider poorly designed), rather than (sounds like) challenging the interviewer on the clarity of her question. If this is indeed an issue, where does the responsibility lie, with the interviewer or the interviewee, or is it simply my perception? Love you know your thoughts.
Diversity in a meal app, that was new for me.
NBU Efforts - Next Billion Users
really amazing interview!
Really helpful
I didn't think this response was that good. It just seemed like there was a ton of confirmation bias. Then again, it's hard to translate PMing workflow into a short interview
i think it’s less about the quality of the solution and more about the thinking of how you got there. the question inherently requires you do go off personal experience. definitely confirmation bias but in a real pm role you’d likely do mkt research and user interviews vs just going off of personal experience
I actually think the answer for which product wasn't good. MyFitnessPal caters to a specific audience but I wouldn't say its a bad product experience. So many "like" in how she speak.
Take a shot every time you hear "like"
Why would you comment that? Now I can’t concentrate on her answer. All I hear is “Like”.