The most comprehensive bank Interview Answer Review tooling available online.

Situation:
While working on the CloudGate (CASB) program at Oracle, I had to collaborate closely with a lead engineer who was highly technical but often resistant to input from non-engineering stakeholders, including program managers like myself.

Task:
Our shared goal was to integrate CloudGate’s policy engine with a third-party SaaS provider under tight deadlines for a compliance milestone. Coordination was critical, but communication friction risked delaying delivery.

Action:
I focused on building mutual respect by first acknowledging his technical expertise and then shifting our interactions to be data- and goal-driven. Instead of pushing process, I came to discussions with clear risk/impact scenarios and timelines tied directly to customer and audit deadlines. I also adapted my style—fewer meetings, more async updates with technical clarity—which matched his preference. Gradually, we established a working rhythm built on outcomes, not personalities.

Result:
We delivered the integration on time, passed the compliance audit, and by the end of the project, had built enough trust that he started proactively surfacing risks to me before I had to ask. The experience reinforced for me that adapting communication style and focusing on shared goals is often more effective than trying to change personalities.

I was working on the large scale entrprise wide program that included multiple teams and stakeholders .During the initial phase of the program on discussion with Business stakeholders , Product Management team , PO , Tech SME to determine the scope of program , prioritization & aligning on the business objectives  and tech objectives there was multiple discussion and it was tough to get the agreement due to multiple people having conflicting agenda and need .  I received the feedback that there was lot of time being wasted and people are not aligning on the subject . This led me to reflect back and breakdown the work and structure of how we were approaching  the topics to be discussed & limiting to the required audience and building a steering committee that will be a small set of devision makers representing from business stakeholders , Product management , Technology team additional I also prepped the teams offline on the discussion topics and things they need to come prepared so that our meeting agenda is clear an we can effectively discuss and prioritize on the scope due to the initial prep work done offline . This helped me in always being open for feedback and being adaptive to the ongoing situation and doing initial ground work so that there is clear and effective communication transparency

I was working on a large scale program that had integration points with Lab and external 3rd party team . We were following a strict timelines and had intially aligned on end to end delivery and various cross coordination effort . since we were dealing with major cross coordination feed files for further processing from 3rd party team we had highlighted the risk to the leadership team but didn't receive a strong follow up on the risk and commitment from the 3rd party organization on the delivery date . This caused us to miss the go live date had to delay . However going forward we had frequent checkpoint calls and also as a backup for testing effort we build mockster and service virutalisation for testing effort so that we can mock the service behavior of the feeds and data that we were supposed to receive from 3rd party team and moved ahead in our schedule .Therefore for all major delivery and critical delivery of the product we assumed variability and defined on the process of backup scenario in case we encounter Andy hurdles / risk

Question: Tell me about a time when you assisted a colleague in his work. What was the result?

Answer:

Sure. I really enjoy helping others on the team, especially when they’re stuck and not sure how to move forward.

S – Situation:
Once, someone on a neighboring team was struggling with a production issue for a few days. I noticed that he seemed frustrated and wanted help, but didn’t quite know how to ask.

T – Task:
After finishing my work early one day, I proactively messaged him on Teams and offered support. He was happy, but mentioned he wasn’t even sure how to describe the problem clearly.

A – Action:
So I sat down with him and tried to understand the issue. He told me that after one of his code changes went live, a dropdown component in our shared UI broke — its layout was completely messed up, even though his change didn’t touch that component directly.
I helped him debug the issue step by step. After ruling out rendering or layout bugs, I noticed the problem was actually due to a CSS variable conflict — the styles weren’t properly isolated, which caused unexpected overrides.
Together, we fixed the CSS scoping issue and verified the dropdown worked as expected.

R – Result:
The bug was resolved and the fix was shared with the wider team via email, to prevent similar issues in the future. My teammate was really grateful, and after that, our collaboration improved significantly.