How did you handle a situation where you couldn't meet a deadline?

Question

Anonymous · Accepted Answer

S - Sales got a new client and they promised to create a product for them in 12
weeks.
T -   As the program director, I was tasked to manage this end to end, when I
reviewd the High level requirements, it was clear that we will not be able to
deliver this entire application in just 12 weeks.
A - I immediately called a meeting with my team to brainstorm solutions and
create a plan, and a roadmap to develop a MVP, that will have the essential
features & enough UI for the client to start their work.  But since we were
working on 2 high visibility products already, I could sense some resistance
from the team.  I assured the team, that I will work with the client and will
only get the most essential and minimal features out first, and can deliver much
more when they actually have time.  so we developed a plan to deliver one small
feature every 2 weeks, so by the end of 12th week, we will have delivered a MVP,
but not a complete application.  
   Then I setup a meeting with the scientist (client), presented to his team,
went over the features, UI and the main security & compliance safeguards that
will be baked in. During the presentation I realized that the client is NOT
familiar with Agile Iterative development, I explained how they will be at an
advantage, with a iterative delivery, than waiting for the whole 12 weeks  to
see anything.  After a quick walk through of the roadmap,  they realized that if
they can iterate this product, they will be able to get more and more features
and the capability can be upgraded at each iteration.

R - They happily agreed to the MVP in 12 weeks, and then we worked with them for
the next 12 week delivery features.  One of the best client we had, and had
referred this product to be developed at other institutes too, and recommeded to
CIOs at ohter institures

Anonymous · Answer

Situation: During the device certification test process with our carrier
customer, we encountered a large number of defects and could not meet the lab
exit schedule
Task:  I worked with the certification team to group the defects into different
severity level and different defect categories to better proritize and identify
a resolution plan to each
Action:  We grouped the defects into four severity levels with level 1 as
absolutely critical to close for lab exit, level 2 being acceptable for
conditional lab exit with a resolution plan, and level 3 are defects that can
been resolved in the MR release, and level 4 are information only or defects
that could be waived by the customers.  We worked with developers and
engineering teams to provide Root cause analysis to identify the root cause and
determine solutions.  We also identified there are features that were outside of
the MVP scope and we negotiated with the customer to deliver the features in a
MR release in 6 months.  This proposal actually worked better with the
customer's launch strategy in which some new features were planned to be
activated at a later time.
Result:  We were able to resolve the severity level 1 defects on time and
launched the devices per original schedule.  The customer agreed to delay one
new feature to a 2nd MR plan six months later.  We delivered the fixes to the
severity 2 defects in the 1st MR plan 3 months after the device launch.  The
customer was pleased that this mitigation plan allowed them to keep the original
go to market schedule while maintaining the product quality.

Anonymous · Answer

In the Meraki integration project, the supply chain process required significant
optimization of the entire flow. To achieve this, most of the shipping-related
process needed to be modified. However, the team lacked sufficient time to
complete the work because the planned use of an adapter did not work, requiring
me to redesign the flow.
With limited time remaining before system integration testing (SIT), the
cross-functional teams and other tracks were ready to test their code, and
management was unwilling to postpone SIT and Cycle 1 testing. Since there was an
additional round of SIT and Cycle 2 testing planned, I decided to proceed with
the changes that the team had already completed. We migrated the completed code
to the test instance and communicated that only Phase 1 of the changes would be
released initially, while the remaining changes would be delivered during Cycle
2 testing.
I ensured the Phase 1 delivery was designed to avoid impacting the end-to-end
flow, allowing the other teams to proceed with testing their portions of the
code. This approach ensured that other teams' deadlines were not affected. I
also informed the cross-functional teams that the OTM and GTM changes were
completed, and the remaining shipping-related code optimization would be
delivered before Cycle 2 testing, along with the next round of SIT.
By taking this approach, I ensured that complete testing was not impacted and
that the project stayed on track.

How did you handle a situation where you couldn't meet a deadline?

Did you come across this question in an interview?

Answers

Also asked as

Try Our AI Interviewer