Google cross-collaboration interview (with ex-Google PM)

Are you ready for Google's cross-collaboration questions? Watch Mark (ex-Senior PM at Google) give fantastic answers to 3 very typical ones.
Candidate: Mark, ex-Google PM interviewer.
Book a coaching session with Mark: igotanoffer.com/en/coach/mark...
Chapters
00:00 Intro
00:44 Q1: How do you resolve conflicting product requirements?
01:15 Q1 - Situation
02:00 Q1 - Problem
02:25 Q1 - Solution
03:55 Q1 - Impact
04:28 Q1 - Lessons
05:05 Q1 - Follow up
06:15 Q2 - How would you tackle a latent bug?
06:30 Q2 - Situation
07:56 Q2 - Problem
08:57 Q2 - Solution
10:20 Q2 - Impact
11:06 Q2 - Lessons
12:45 Q3. Sales team have made promises that don't fit your roadmap.
13:00 Q3 - Situation
14:00 Q3 - Problem
14:38 Q3 - Solution
17:00 Q3 - Impact
17:45 Q3 - Lessons
18:15 Q3 - Follow up
About us:
IGotAnOffer is the leading career coaching marketplace ambitious professionals turn to for help at high-stakes moments in their career. Get a job, negotiate your salary, get a promotion, plan your next career steps - we've got you covered whenever you need us.
Come and find us here: igotanoffer.com/?Y...

[@IGotAnOfferPM]

Get 1-1 interview coaching and land a PM job at Google. Browse our coaches or take our Google PM course: igotanoffer.com/en/interview-coaching/type/tech-interview?RUclips&

[@vivekparepalli]

Thanks for another great video and all the content you create on this channel.
I have an additional perspective to conflict resolution question.
Referring directly to an escalation in interview response is little risky. Depending on the personality of the interviewer, an approach of escalation can be negatively viewed as "this candidate doesn't have a back, and would like to pass on the problems to higher-ups".
So a a little more safer approach to answer this question could be,
Step 1: Detailing out a framework one would use to negotiate with all relevant parties (example; using a RICE framework to stack rank all requirements),
Step 2: Stack ranking eliminates most conflicts as requirements are being measured basis clear outcomes, and the outcomes which are aligned with org. goals for the year. Technically in companies like FAANG one has to respect data driven approaches, so post this process very few conflicts would remain to debate.
Step 3: For the reminder of conflicts, one could explore alternates like, scope rationalisation across quarters , doing scrappy in this quarter and a platform approach in subsequent qtr etc
Step 4: If conflicts still exist, invite conflicting parties (+ respective seniors) for a conversation over a meeting, and then summarise pros and cons for each of the conflicting requirement. A meeting helps view the situation as collaborative exercise vs a email as pure escalation.
At the end of the day, human sensitivities play a very major role in handling a conflict scenario via escalation approach.

[@IGotAnOfferPM]

Great contribution, thanks Vivek.

[@dhrumilbarot1431]

Great!

[@diptahi]

Solve conflict through escalation ? That's just passing the buck !!

[@daddyV88]

Not true at all, and depends on the org! One can attempt to build consensus through influence, but if the teams are federated and speed to market is your goal, escalation is the optimal path forward. It has such a negative connotation but should really be viewed as a tool to help hasten decision-making when there isn't a clear win-win available for all parties

[@AkshdeepSinghoney]

Agreed, this is most unprofessional way to solve a conflict.

[@nishant.singh1727]

good job guys