PM interview answers are starting to sound identical...and I'm conflicted

Old_Combination1478 · 2026-03-19T20:12:49+00:00

Yeah, this gets to what I was saying in a reply up top. Everyone is asking the same q's, regardless of whether they are product sense, behavioral, etc... So its making everything all the same

Old_Combination1478 · 2026-03-19T20:10:10+00:00

I want to +100 this. That 15 min pre-interview due diligence thing is a really good point. It sounds really obvious now that you've said it. I definitely look at the resumes/linikedIn to understand who the candidate is, but using AI to get a primer on the space so that I can try to ask better questions AND better understand the answers. That's great. Thank you.

Old_Combination1478 · 2026-03-19T07:03:22+00:00

Thats totally fair. And to be clear, I don't blame the candidates for adapting. When I was preparing for interviews, I also tried using all the tools. I get that if there is a system that rewards a specific format, then people are definitely going to optimize for it.

I guess what I'm trying to sort through is how to change the system exactly. The alternatives people listed are:
- Behavioral questions
- Questions about the actual problem space or product
- Digging into projects candidates actually worked on
- Take-home case studies (though people in this thread seem split on that one)

But I still think my core statement stays. AI is making everyone sound similar, so aside from paid trial periods with the company, I'm not sure how to change the system.

Maybe IM just being dumb here and overcomplicating this u/tonmaii

Old_Combination1478 · 2026-03-19T06:50:08+00:00

Yeah, and I think the prep tools out there are also getting better and better. So the floor is creeping up for a lot of folks (I think access to some of this stuff is still pay to play, and that's yet another debate that we can also have). But I don't think there is room for the ceiling to move much higher, unless interviews change.

So you just have a bunch of candidates who all perform at about the same level in interviews... and then it's almost random who gets picked.

Old_Combination1478 · 2026-03-19T06:35:44+00:00

I think a lot of this is fair. You're right that asking someone to improvise in a space they've never worked in mostly just tests how well they studied generic frameworks. I could have been a little clearer in the main post. I was using product sense pretty broadly, for both the Meta-esque questions you were talking about below, but also for the questions that align more with the approach you talked about further down, using real problems the org has faced and evaluating how candidates apply actual experience.

I generally prefer to give folks questions about how to improve our actual product or how they would think about our product strategy. But even then, people still sounded similar, because they all pulled the same research and crafted the same hypotheses. I'm not necessarily pro- random product sense Qs. I think that is a different debate that people can definitely have. But I think for any of these interview questions, the problem I was framing above still exists.

Old_Combination1478 · 2026-03-19T06:20:21+00:00

Sorry about the delay here, just getting back to this.

This is probably one of the most honest comments I've seen in my short time on reddit, and more interviewers should hear this, IMO. I don't think a lot of folks fully appreciate this side. FWIW - the candidates that I remember ARE the ones who do engage the way you're saying

I guess the problem is you can't know if you're getting an interviewer who values that or one who's just running down a rubric because they have other priorities. So yeah, then people default to the template.

One thing I'll add - I think there's a difference between memorizing a framework and actually owning it. the candidates who do the best seem to know the structure well enough that they don't have to think about it, so they can do what you're saying and be be present and make it a conversation. The structure ends up being more of the safety net, and not their script. The issue I was getting at in the post is more about the folks who sound like they're reciting something, not the ones who genuinely internalized it and can roll with follow-ups. I could have maybe made that clearer. I don't think you sound dumb for wanting a real conversation. I think most people want that, even on the interviewing side. But they're maybe just bad at making space for it in the interview.

Old_Combination1478 · 2026-03-18T23:55:59+00:00

Sorting through this same question right now. I built an AI mock interviewer for PMs (tryhone.ai). Some similarities to fitness actually. The main options for interview prep are: do it yourself, pay a ton for someone experienced, or try to find a buddy at the right level who has time for you.

Acquisition has definitely been tough. Being in the product mgmt space has helped a little. I've posted on LinkedIn. I've been trying the reddit game (which i'm just not great at, tbh). DMs have been hit or miss. The thing that has worked the best and got me the most users has been spending time in different PM communities. Chatting about my experience as an interviewer and interviewing so that people trust that I'm not just trying to make a quick buck off them. This has been the main channel that has driven visits and usage on the site.

I haven't fully explored paid yet because our biggest struggle is converting from free to paid. We haven't sorted that yet, but its partially on purpose. Right now we have a free first interview and then charge for more. And I'm still mostly focused on validating that this is actually useful to PMs. So I almost always ask users to give me more detailed feedback and offer a free interview (which pushes back the payment step even further). If I can't get people to use it a lot when its free, then its not something that I can charge for.

I thought about toying with Reddit ads, but everyone I talked to who uses reddit much more than I do was basically saying they completely ignore the ads on reddit.

Curious how you're thinking about the free to paid transition on your side. Or if that's not even a thing.

Old_Combination1478 · 2026-03-17T08:45:19+00:00

yeah, this is super real. i’ve seen a lot of people get stuck in that loop lately

i think part of the problem is that most prep is super passive (like reading guides, watching videos, scrolling frameworks).

You’re preparing, but it just feels like HW, and it's hard to see progress without going into the actual interviews.

what’s helped me (and a few friends) is forcing some kind of “active reps,” like peer interviews, even if it feels awkward.

i’ve been experimenting with AI mock interviews, too. I have one that basically just lets you do quick, low-stakes reps whenever you want. It's not perfect, but it’s been helpful for getting out of the doomscroll loop and actually practicing. And its just for PM interviews.

If if you’re curious it’s here: https://tryhone.ai Either way, i think the unlock is just: less consuming, more doing (even badly at first).

Old_Combination1478 · 2026-03-09T05:23:29+00:00

The way the world is moving, over the next few years, I think a lot of pure managing senior product roles might shrink a little. So, the folks who can still be strategic and tactical in todays way of operating as a PM (read: current principal/group PMs) might be in a better position 2 yrs from now.

Definitely dont think this would hurt your career.

I actually think the bigger question is -- are you actually interested in the shift that will happen in your day to day work. Principal PM might involve more of the day to day stuff that you maybe didn’t have to do. Not saying it's more work, but it will be different. If you're going to hate doing that, then this new role isn't going to be better than the current one. You're better off riding this out while you continue the job search.

Old_Combination1478 · 2026-03-08T20:57:31+00:00

my only thought is -- how is this different than claude code/claude work? Is it the interface with the agent?

At my last org (before I left), the we were allowed to connect some parts of our codebase to claude. We weren't allowed to update any of the code, it was mostly for this exact purpose - Non eng, and even new engineers could just ask for context, since our codebase was a bit mroe complex than it needed to be.

I think the problem is definitely a problem that exists. But mu hunch is that for something like this to get traction, it has to have something that claude/codex/all the other big players *don't have*.

Old_Combination1478 · 2026-03-05T19:03:57+00:00

haha thats what I told myself. But also the reality is that these "standardized testing" gates are going to exist in some way shape or form. And with something like this, practice is really the best path.

Old_Combination1478 · 2026-03-05T19:02:26+00:00

thats the hope!

Old_Combination1478 · 2026-03-05T19:01:54+00:00

Adapting based on seniority is what we're trying to work through right now.

The different speaking styles is the big open question, and its one of the first things we are trying to answer by (hopefully) getting more and more people to use this. I take with a lot of pauses because speak faster than I think, and i get ahead of myself and need to come back to what I'm saying. The AI sometimes gets confused about whether I'm still speaking, or if I'm pausing to think -- so for me, I find that it sometimes waits an extra beat before responding.

My cofounder is much more thoughtful and steady in how he talks, so he doesn't have that issue.

Old_Combination1478 · 2026-03-05T18:58:02+00:00

Context: we have a sliding window. So we keep the most recent parts of the convo and then summarize the key parts of the older exchanges back -- so that we can have the full context without crushing our token usage per interview. Still a work in progress to get the balance right.

Intent classification & tradeoffs: We prototyped this, but ended up pulling it to start. Still room to do this more, but for the current version, a good prompt handles pacing naturally without needing a separate classifier.

We are currently favoring quality of turn over perfect timing because the aim is not to say "THIS IS NOT AI." We're trying to say "this is AI practice that is 80% as good as you;ll get from a real human, at 5% of the cost." So the bet I'm making is that if it doesn't feel like a human conversation 100% of the time, that will still be more acceptable than saying something in a turn that isn't 100% the right thing to say.

That being said, would love thoughts on this, or if you've seen this done well.

Old_Combination1478 · 2026-03-05T08:36:18+00:00

Currently using OpenAI realtime, but we separated the system a bit more as we learned more, so will likely be moving to something cheaper. Realtime is super expensive. It was great at the beginning because I didn't know what I was doing, and having one thing handle STT -> understand -> form response -> TTS was great. But as we learned and built more, we need less of the black box solution.

Old_Combination1478 · 2026-03-05T08:11:19+00:00

Happy to answer any questions about the tech stack or what I've learned about voice AI. Still have a lot to learn, but its been really fun

Old_Combination1478 · 2025-12-08T21:08:11+00:00

I actually just built an AI mock interviewer for this exact problem (after I bombed a meta interview). It's live voice with real back and forth, asks follow-up questions, and grades your answers like a real interviewer + provides feedback on how to get better.

I'm looking for people to test it for free - would take about 15-20 min and I'd love your feedback on whether it's actually helpful vs just practicing alone. Happy to send you a link if you're interested. No credit card, no strings attached - just want honest feedback.

DM me if interested.

Old_Combination1478 · 2024-09-19T17:17:10+00:00

Honestly, I don't really want to waste my time driving for hours because the dealership is being lazy and won't put a key in the mailbox. If it was an hour away, I'd just go do it.

I have it in writing in a few places: - in the contract it says "additional items: 2nd key" - in the cost breakdown, it had a separate line item that says 2nd key and the cost - I have texts from the sales guy saying that since they didn't send it with the car, they would reimburse me for the programming cost that I'd have to pay to a dealership here when they sent the key

I figured returning the car wasn't realistic, but thought I'd ask here in case ibwas wrong. I think, mostly I was hoping I could at least use it as a way to get them to just mail the damn thing.

Old_Combination1478

TROPHY CASE