IntermediateBEHAVIORAL
Think about a time in one of your three projects when a key requirement or priority changed late in the timeline. How did you adapt your work, communicate with stakeholders, and ensure the project still moved forward successfully?
Resume-Based
General

Sample Answer

On a recent project building a new internal dashboard for about 150 account managers, we were three weeks from launch when leadership decided the MVP had to include role-based access control instead of a single shared view. That was a pretty fundamental shift. I paused feature work and pulled the tech lead, PM, and design into a quick working session. I proposed a lightweight permission model using existing LDAP groups, so we didn’t have to invent new infra. I then reworked the data access layer to centralize all authorization checks and added a small auditing table so compliance could see who accessed what. To keep everyone aligned, I wrote a one-page impact summary with the new scope, risks, and what we were cutting from the MVP. We still launched on the original date, just with a trimmed reporting set, and within a month access-related support tickets dropped by roughly 60% compared to the legacy tool.

Keywords

Late-breaking requirement for role-based access control close to launchCollaborative planning with tech lead, PM, and design to reshape scopeLeveraged existing LDAP and centralized auth layer to minimize riskClear communication of trade-offs allowed on-time launch with 60% fewer access tickets