Your Dashboard
Interview Coaching
Learn
System Design
ML System Design
Code
Behavioral
Salary Negotiation
Interview Guides
Tell me about a project where the requirements were not clear or kept changing. How did you adapt and maintain productivity?
Asked at:
Meta
Amazon
Bloomberg
Uber
What is this question about
Interviewers want evidence that you can turn ambiguity into traction without burning time or goodwill. They’re looking for your discovery process, how you preserve momentum via scoping and sequencing, and how you communicate changes transparently. For more senior candidates, they also assess whether you install guardrails and improve the system so the team/org thrashes less next time.
Key Insights
- Your job isn’t to tough it out under fog; it’s to create clarity quickly and cheaply. Show how you converted unknowns into testable assumptions and decisions (spikes, mocks, decision docs).
- Maintain productivity means delivering highest-impact, highest-confidence slices while learning. Talk about MVPs, sequencing by risk, reversible decisions, and clear kill/switch criteria.
- Avoid blame. Own the parts you controlled and describe the guardrails you put in place so churn diminished for everyone, not just you.
What interviewers probe atlevel
Top Priority
Surface risks early and share what you’ll do next, not just blockers.
Good examples
🟢I posted a short update: what’s unclear, my assumption, and the 1-day spike I’m running to validate it.
🟢I flagged a risk early and proposed two paths with estimates so we could pick quickly.
Bad examples
🔴I kept quiet until I was definitely blocked, then asked for help.
🔴I said I was waiting on PM, but didn’t share alternatives.
Broadcasting blockers versus proposing paths and timelines to resolution.
Don’t wait for perfect specs—surface unknowns and run small, fast experiments.
Good examples
🟢I listed open questions, wrote my assumptions, and ran a 2-hour spike to validate the API shape before coding.
🟢I mocked up the flow in Figma and did a 15-minute review with PM/QA the same day to lock the core path.
Bad examples
🔴I waited a week for the PM to finalize the spec and picked up some low-priority bugs in the meantime.
🔴I just implemented what seemed right from the doc and had to redo it when the requirements changed.
Passive execution versus initiating lightweight discovery to replace guesswork with quick validation.
Valuable
Use small guardrails like feature flags, TODOs, and decision notes.
Good examples
🟢I put the new flow behind a flag and noted outstanding assumptions in the PR description.
🟢I added a decision note in the README and wrote TODOs with owners for follow-ups.
Bad examples
🔴I hard-coded values until things settled and planned to clean up later.
🔴I merged a big PR because we were behind and figured we’d fix issues after.
Creating future debt versus small, intentional guardrails that localize change.
Name one thing you’d do differently and how you changed your habit.
Good examples
🟢I realized I was coding too far ahead; I now validate assumptions with a quick spike before building.
🟢I asked for feedback on my questions list and learned to propose options instead of only raising blockers.
Bad examples
🔴The requirements kept changing, so there wasn’t much I could do.
🔴PM didn’t know what they wanted; I just waited.
Externalizing blame versus owning a specific improvement and adopting it.
Question Timeline
See when this question was last asked and where, including any notes left by other candidates.
Early October, 2025
Meta
Senior
Late September, 2025
Meta
Senior
Late September, 2025
Meta
Senior
Comments
Hello Interview Premium
Your account is free and you can post anonymously if you choose.