The most comprehensive bank Interview Answer Review tooling available online.

The individual in question was hired for a new team I was setting up to build a product from scratch for an internal client. Since this was a new initiative, we needed to collaborate with multiple internal partners and conduct a series of brainstorming sessions. Unfortunately, this candidate frequently exhibited a fixed mindset during discussions, often leading to arguments that created discomfort among other team members.

I noticed this behavior during meetings, and several team members shared similar concerns in their one-on-ones, mentioning that their ideas and opinions were often dismissed or debated. This feedback highlighted a risk to team morale and the potential loss of valuable input from the group.

I addressed these concerns with the individual directly, emphasizing that teamwork and collaboration are essential to our success, and that respecting others’ input strengthens the final product. Although the individual initially seemed receptive, the behavior persisted. Consequently, I implemented formal coaching on teamwork and collaboration, and took a more active role in guiding discussions to create a comfortable environment for the team. The individual was placed on a PIP (Performance Improvement Plan) focused on teamwork in their focal review. Over subsequent quarterly reviews, I observed significant improvement in their approach to team discussions, with notable progress in collaborative behavior.

Have a curious mind and approach with understanding. Talk to the person 1x1, see what's up and go from there.

Situation: During the first calibration of Non-Maturity Deposit (NMD) models, I was working with a senior colleague and a consultancy firm to implement these models. At that time, market rates were rising, and the consultancy firm suggested calibrating a key parameter, the "beta," to be highly sensitive to market rates. My manager agreed, but I disagreed, as I believed this high sensitivity could lead to inaccurate estimations in future calibrations.

Action: I engaged in discussions with my manager and the consultancy firm to fully understand their reasoning. They argued that a more sensitive beta could improve management of metrics like Delta EVE and Delta NII, which was valid. However, I pointed out that we lacked sufficient evidence to support such a high beta and that it might cause issues in future estimations. To address the disagreement, I conducted a sensitivity analysis, testing the model under various market rate scenarios.

Result: The sensitivity analysis helped us reach a compromise. We agreed to lower the beta, ensuring more stability in the model's performance. This adjustment allowed for a smoother transition of the parameter, ultimately improving the model's reliability while maintaining good risk management practices.

I once led a restructuring initiative aimed at aligning resources with delivery accounts and redesigning KPIs. While the planning and communication strategy were solid, I overlooked whether our data platforms could support the new changes. Just before rollout, I discovered serious data integrity issues. This setback required a major clean-up effort across teams, but we corrected course by prioritizing platform readiness and enhancing our validation processes for future initiatives.

When buildling the next generation instance, during the planning phase I budget the amount of servers we will launch the product with. Given each server cost was over 2 million dollar I biased to towards frugality and provided a bare minimum number of server we could launch with. But what I completely missed was during the developement some servers will end up in bad state and the engineering team will short of servers to test the software and firmware getting built which made meeting the project timeline riskly and heavily dependent on delivery schedules of servers and them staying healthy. This quickly became a bottleneck that I realized. I quickly put togther a plan to request adittional server and provide a detailed breakdown on where and how these would be used during and after developement. Synced with the hardware and ODM team and executives to get a approval and ordered the parts to get the servers and racks build at ODM.