Hi community,
I have a question for you. What is the most important thing that an interviewer consider during an interview?
Hi there,
You need to picture yourself at the client site, in front of a whiteboard, with your team, figuring out what you need to do next on this project.
Truly reflect on what you need, what you're missing, or what you don't currently understand about the situation. Then, ask questions to fill this in.
This is super hard to learn, and impossible to teach through some written tips/techniques. Ultimately, coaching is the best way to learn this.
How to drive a case forward in an objective-driven manner
The hypothesis-led approach is outdated.
Rather, you need to have a hypothesES-driven or, rather, and objective-driven approach. Your entire framework is a set of hypotheses and views as to how to solve a problem.
In my view, the more natural the better. I tend to say things like "My thinking here is x". or "Based on what I know about x and y, I think this'll likely happen" or "My inclination is x".
Please get away from saying any generic, i.e. hypothesis, framework, buckets, clarifying questions, etc.!
This Q&A Describes Better Hypothesis Thinking
Remember that your framework is essentially a set of hypotheses. That's why I prefer to call this "hypotheses-drive approach" or "objective-driven approach"
You don't need to state it explicitly, but remember that 1) You need to always be thinking about one and 2) You need to be demonstrating your drive towards one.
Also, remember that a hypothesis isn't necessarily "I believe x is the cause". Be better hypothesis is "If we can see what's happening with A, and A is going up, and then we look into B and B is big, then x is likely the case".
A hypothesis is much more about what questions do I need to ask/answer and how, in order to see what's happening.
Another way of viewing it:
Your framework is your structure for approaching the problem. It consits of a few main areas you'd like to look at. Inherent in your framework is a view that "If I answer A, B, and C, then we have an answer"
So, for market entry:
1) If the market is big, and it's growing, then we still want to considering entering
2) If #1 = yes, then let's see if it's attractive...can we win there? Is our product good/better than our competition's? Etc. If yes, let's definitely consider entering.
3) If #1 and #2 = yes, then, when we do enter, are we sure we can win? I.e. do we have the right plans. Will implementation actually pan out? Do we have the expertise, capital, etc.? In other words, if #2 is the thearectical, #3 is the reality.
Then, your summary becomes "I believe we should enter the market, if we can prove it's a good market, the it's attractive to us specifically, and that we will win it".
^Now this is a hypothesis :)
Read these 2 Q&As for some great context + discussion:
Hope this helps! This is a tricky topic that's difficult to properly answer in writting...if you want a more thorough explanation, and training in the mindset shift required here, don't hesitate
Very simply, the interviewers want to know if you're able to think through a problem in a structured and creative way. As you go through the interview they are looking for whether you're addressing the problem as a new problem, or whether you are repeating a framework and not thinking it through.
This is why it's important to focus on not trying to force fit frameworks to a question and to present them in a thought through manner.
Expert case by