Learn and be curious

1. Tell me about a time when you realized you needed a deeper level of subject matter
expertise to do your job well. What did you do about it? What was the outcome? Is there
anything you would have done differently?

Situation:

During my role as a QA Analyst on the Estimation Tool project at Optiom Inc., I was responsible for
ensuring that the tool accurately calculated transfer credits and cancellation refunds. This tool was
designed to help the Client Care department efficiently handle policy transfers and cancellations. While
developing and executing test cases, I realized that I needed a deeper understanding of insurance
policies, premium calculations, and business rules to verify the accuracy of the estimations and ensure
compliance with industry standards.

Task:

To perform thorough testing, I needed to ensure that:

1. Transfer credits and cancellation refunds were accurately calculated for different policy
statuses and payment methods.
2. Role-based access was correctly implemented so only authorized users (Client Care Managers)
could process cancellations or transfers.
3. Backdating scenarios up to 3 months were handled correctly to align with real-world policy
adjustments.

However, I found that some calculations were complex, and I lacked the domain expertise to validate
them confidently.

Action:

To bridge this knowledge gap, I took the following steps:

 Collaborated with SMEs (Subject Matter Experts) in the Client Care and Finance teams to
understand premium calculations, refunds, and adjustments.
 Reviewed policy documentation and business rules to comprehend how different scenarios
affected estimations.
 Attended meetings with developers and product managers to clarify system logic and ensure
testing scenarios covered all possible edge cases.
 Refined my test cases based on the new insights, ensuring they aligned with real business
workflows and regulatory requirements.

Result:

As a result of these efforts:

✅ I was able to validate 80 test scenarios more effectively, ensuring that the tool provided accurate
estimations.
✅ The Estimation Tool was successfully released, significantly improving efficiency for the Client Care
team.
✅ My proactive approach helped improved the overall user experience by 35%, reducing errors and the
need for manual corrections.
✅ I gained valuable domain knowledge, which improved my ability to test financial applications in future
projects.

Reflection (What I would do differently):

While my approach was effective, in hindsight, I would have:

🔹 Engaged with SMEs earlier in the process to shorten the learning curve and speed up testing.
🔹 Requested training sessions on insurance policy calculations at the start of the project to proactively
build domain expertise.

2. Describe a time when you took on work outside of your comfort area. How did you identify
what you needed to learn to be successful? How did you go about building expertise to meet
your goal? Did you meet your goal?
Situation:

While working as a QA Analyst on the Estimation Tool project at Optiom Inc., I was primarily
responsible for manual and functional testing to ensure the tool accurately processed policy transfers
and cancellations. However, during a project review, stakeholders raised concerns about how the tool
would perform under high user load, especially during peak business hours.

Since performance and load testing weren’t initially part of my role, this was outside my comfort
zone. However, ensuring that the tool could handle multiple concurrent requests without performance
degradation was crucial for a successful launch.

Task:

My challenge was to quickly learn and implement load testing to measure the tool’s performance. This
required me to:

1. Identify the right load testing tool that could simulate multiple users accessing the Estimation
Tool.
2. Understand key performance metrics such as response time, throughput, and system stability.
3. Design and execute load tests to simulate real-world usage scenarios.
4. Create 100 users for testing the performance

Action:

To tackle this challenge, I took the following steps:

✅ Researched Load Testing Tools: After consulting with the development team, I chose JMeter as it
was widely used for load testing and compatible with our system.
✅ Self-Learning & Training: I completed online tutorials in 1 week time to understand how to design
and execute load tests.
✅ Collaborated with DevOps & Developers: I worked closely with them to set up a test environment
that mimicked real-world traffic.
✅ Designed Load Testing Scenarios: I simulated different 40 Test scenarios, including:
  Normal usage (average traffic)
 Peak usage (high concurrent users)
 Stress testing (pushing the system to its limits)
✅ Analyzed & Reported Results: After executing tests, I analyzed response time was
decreased , system bottlenecks, and failure points, providing detailed reports to the
development team for optimization.

Result:

🔹 I successfully identified performance bottlenecks, leading to database query optimizations that

improved response times by 30%.
🔹 The tool was optimized before deployment, ensuring a smooth user experience even during peak
hours.
🔹 My efforts prevented potential system crashes by 25% and improved the tool’s reliability.
🔹 I developed load testing expertise, adding a valuable skill set to my QA role.

3. Tell me about a time when you didn’t know what to do next or how to solve a challenging
problem. How do you learn what you don't know? What were the options you considered?
How did you decide the best path forward? What was the outcome?

Situation:

While working as a QA Analyst on the Estimation Tool project at Optiom Inc., I encountered a major
challenge when testing the tool’s handling 3 month backdated policy cancellations. The system was
supposed to calculate refund amounts accurately, but during testing, I noticed inconsistencies—
sometimes the refund was incorrect by atleast $125 , and in other cases, the tool rejected valid
cancellation requests.

I wasn’t sure whether the issue was related to business rules, system logic, or database calculations,
and I didn’t immediately know how to proceed. Given the complexity of insurance policy calculations, I
needed to find the right approach to troubleshoot and resolve the issue effectively.

Task:

My objective was to:

1. Identify the root cause of the issue (business rule misinterpretation, system defect, or data-
related problem).
2. Explore different approaches to understand and validate the correct refund calculation process.
3. Collaborate with stakeholders to ensure alignment between system functionality and business
requirements.

Action:

To resolve this challenge, I took the following steps:

✅ Researched Business Rules: I reviewed policy documentation and met with the Client Care team to
understand the intended refund calculation process.
✅ Examined System Logs & Database: I collaborated with the development team to analyze system
logs and database transactions, checking how refund amounts were being calculated and stored.
✅ Considered Multiple Hypotheses:

 Option 1: The issue was caused by an incorrect implementation of backdated calculations.

 Option 2: The refund logic had an unintended dependency on payment methods.
 Option 3: User role permissions were interfering with the cancellation process.
✅ Selected the Best Path Forward: After thorough investigation, I identified that the problem
stemmed from a rounding error in the calculation logic when certain payment plans were
used. I worked with developers to replicate the issue and validate a fix.

Result:

🔹 The fix was successfully implemented, ensuring accurate refund calculations for backdated
cancellations.
🔹 The Client Care team’s workflow improved, reducing manual corrections and customer complaints.
🔹 My proactive approach helped bridge the gap between QA, development, and business teams,
ensuring the tool functioned as expected.
🔹 I gained confidence in breaking down complex problems, enhancing my troubleshooting and critical
thinking skills.

Reflection (What I would do differently):

While I successfully resolved the issue, in hindsight, I would have:

🔹 Used SQL queries earlier to verify refund calculations at the database level.
🔹 Suggested adding unit tests to catch similar issues during development.
🔹 Documented common troubleshooting steps for future testing scenarios.

4. We all have things about ourselves we'd like to improve on at work. Give me an example of
something that you've worked on to improve your overall work effectiveness. What
resources did you identify to help you develop? What was the impact?
Situation:

In my role as a QA Analyst at Optiom Inc., I realized that my communication and collaboration with
cross-functional teams could be improved.

As part of the Estimation Tool project, I was working closely with developers, business analysts, and
the Client Care team. However, there were times when I wasn’t as clear as I could have been in
conveying test results or understanding requirements, which sometimes led to delays in feedback or
misalignments between teams.

Task:

My goal was to:

1. Improve communication skills to ensure that information about test results, issues, and project
progress was conveyed clearly and effectively.
2. Collaborate better with cross-functional teams to address any blockers quickly and ensure a
more streamlined workflow.
 3. Enhance my ability to interpret and clarify requirements, ensuring that all teams were aligned
on expectations.

Action:

To achieve this, I took the following steps:

✅ Attended Communication Workshops: I enrolled in a professional development course focused on
clear communication and effective collaboration in technical settings.
✅ Sought Mentorship: I asked more experienced colleagues to review my communication style and
provide feedback on how I could be more concise and direct.
✅ Implemented Weekly Sync-Ups: I initiated weekly cross-team meetings to discuss ongoing progress,
issues, and requirements for the Estimation Tool, ensuring that everyone was on the same page.
✅ Used Visual Tools: I started incorporating diagrams, flowcharts, and status reports in my
communication to make technical issues easier to understand.
✅ Clarified Requirements Upfront: I took more initiative in asking questions during requirement
discussions, making sure I fully understood the business logic and technical expectations.

Result:

🔹 My communication with cross-functional teams became much clearer and more efficient, reducing
misunderstandings and improving collaboration.
🔹 We were able to resolve blockers faster, and the team’s productivity improved as a result of better
alignment.
🔹 The quality of test reporting and defect tracking improved, as stakeholders found it easier to follow
the progress and outcomes of testing efforts.
🔹 I received positive feedback from peers and managers, and this improvement also helped me become a
more effective leader during team meetings.

Reflection (What I would do differently):

While my communication improved, I would have:

🔹 Started earlier by proactively seeking feedback on communication style early in my role.
🔹 Created templates for common communication scenarios (e.g., test reports, issue tracking) to
streamline documentation.
🔹 Conducted team retrospectives to discuss how we could further improve collaboration and
communication.

5. Give me an example of a time when you explored a new or unexpected area of an existing
space. Why hadn't this been explored already? Why did you move forward? What were the
results or what was the impact?

Situation:

While working as a QA Analyst on the Estimation Tool project at Optiom Inc., I noticed that our
testing primarily focused on functionality, performance, and security, but we had not explored
accessibility testing. Since the tool was designed for the Client Care department, which included users
with different abilities and preferences, I realized that if the system was not accessible, it could hinder
productivity and violate compliance standards such as WCAG (Web Content Accessibility Guidelines).
The reason accessibility testing had not been prioritized was that it was not explicitly required in the
initial project scope. However, I recognized that ensuring accessibility would enhance usability for all
users, including those with visual impairments, motor disabilities, or cognitive challenges.

Task:

My objective was to:

1. Assess the tool’s accessibility and identify areas that might be challenging for users with
disabilities.
2. Conduct accessibility testing to ensure compliance with industry standards.
3. Provide recommendations to the development team to improve usability.

Action:

To address this, I took the following steps:

✅ Researched Accessibility Guidelines: I studied WCAG 2.1 standards and familiarized myself with
common accessibility issues in web applications.
✅ Used Accessibility Testing Tools: I utilized tools like AXE, WAVE, and NVDA (screen reader) to
test for color contrast, keyboard navigation, and screen reader compatibility.
✅ Performed Manual Testing: I attempted to navigate the Estimation Tool using only a keyboard,
ensuring that all interactive elements were accessible without a mouse.
✅ Collaborated with the Development Team: I documented and reported issues such as low contrast
on key buttons, missing ARIA labels for screen readers, and inaccessible form fields.
✅ Advocated for Accessibility Fixes: I worked with developers to implement color contrast
improvements, keyboard shortcuts, and proper alt text for images/icons to enhance usability.

Result:

🔹 The team implemented several accessibility improvements, making the tool more user-friendly for all
employees.
🔹 The contrast and keyboard navigation enhancements significantly improved usability for users with
visual impairments.
🔹 The Client Care department provided positive feedback, as the tool became more intuitive and
easier to use.
🔹 My initiative led to accessibility testing being included in future QA processes, ensuring that
usability remained a priority.
🔹 I developed a deeper understanding of inclusive design and became a key advocate for accessibility
within the QA team.

Reflection (What I would do differently):

While the project was successful, I would have:

🔹 Introduced accessibility testing earlier in the project timeline.
🔹 Conducted real-user testing with employees who rely on assistive technologies.
🔹 Explored automation for accessibility testing to streamline future efforts.
 6. Describe a time when someone on your team challenged you to think differently about a
problem. What was the situation? How did you respond? What was the outcome?

Situation:

While working as a QA Analyst on the Estimation Tool project at Optiom Inc., my initial approach to
testing was heavily focused on functional validation and business logic. I aimed to ensure that policy
transfers and cancellations calculated the correct refunds and credits.

During a test case review meeting, a developer challenged me to think beyond functional correctness
and consider real-world edge cases, such as concurrent transactions—what would happen if multiple
users tried to cancel the same policy at the same time?

I had initially assumed that the system handled such cases correctly, as it followed the business logic.
However, this feedback made me realize that I hadn’t explicitly tested for race conditions and
concurrency issues, which could potentially lead to duplicate transactions or data inconsistencies.

Task:

My goal was to:

1. Rethink my test strategy to incorporate edge cases that could arise in real-world usage.
2. Test how the system handled concurrent transactions and ensure data integrity.
3. Collaborate with the developer to address any weaknesses in the system’s handling of
simultaneous requests.

Action:

To address this, I took the following steps:

✅ Researched Concurrency Testing: I studied how race conditions occur in web applications and how
databases handle simultaneous updates.
✅ Designed New Test Scenarios: I created test cases where two users tried to cancel the same policy at
the exact same time to see if the system would allow duplicate actions.
✅ Performed Concurrent User Testing: Using JMeter, I simulated multiple users interacting with the
system simultaneously.
✅ Collaborated with the Developer: After identifying a data integrity issue, I worked closely with the
developer to ensure that the system implemented proper locking mechanisms to prevent duplicate
transactions.
✅ Retested After Fixes: Once the development team implemented a transaction locking mechanism, I
reran the concurrency tests to confirm that the issue was resolved.

Result:

🔹 Identified a critical flaw in the system where multiple users could trigger duplicate cancellations,
leading to incorrect refunds.
🔹 The development team implemented a locking mechanism, ensuring that only one transaction could be
processed per policy at a time.
🔹 My test strategy improved significantly, making me more aware of the importance of real-world edge
case testing beyond just business logic.
🔹 The experience strengthened cross-team collaboration, and I became more open to feedback-driven
learning.

Reflection (What I would do differently):

While this experience helped me grow, I would have:

🔹 Engaged with developers earlier to align testing strategies with technical risks.
🔹 Proactively included edge cases in my test planning instead of focusing primarily on functional
correctness.
🔹 Explored automated concurrency testing tools to make these checks more efficient in future projects.

7. Tell me about a time when you used external trends to improve your own company's
products or services. How did you keep up to date with external trends? How did you
decide to apply them to your own company? What was the result?

Situation:

While working as a QA Analyst on the Estimation Tool project at Optiom Inc., I observed that
customers often struggled with updating their policy details, modifying monthly payment options,
and adding travel-related services. This resulted in long call durations with Client Care Agents, as they
had to verbally guide customers step-by-step, which often led to confusion and errors.

I learned that leading insurance companies were implementing Collaborative Browsing (Co-
browsing) solutions to enhance customer support. Recursive Labs’ Co-browsing software was a
promising tool that would allow Client Care Agents to see the customer’s screen in real time and guide
them visually through the process. However, the tool was not yet integrated into our customer support
system, and I saw an opportunity to validate its impact.

Task:

My goal was to:

1. Test and validate the Co-browsing tool to ensure seamless integration with Optiom’s customer
portal.
2. Ensure security and compliance by verifying that sensitive customer data remained protected.
3. Measure the tool’s impact on customer experience and support efficiency.

Action:

✅ Collaborated with the Product & Support Teams: I worked with stakeholders to understand the
main pain points in customer interactions and identify how Co-browsing could address them.
✅ Developed Test Scenarios: I designed real-world test cases where a Client Care Agent would:

 Assist a customer in navigating their policy profile.

 Guide them through updating their monthly payment options.
 Help them add travel-related insurance services before a trip.
✅ Conducted Security & Usability Testing: I ensured the Co-browsing tool:
  Masked sensitive data (e.g., payment details) to maintain privacy.
 Provided a seamless user experience without causing lag or connectivity issues.
 Allowed agents to annotate and highlight areas on the screen without taking control.
✅ Collected Agent & Customer Feedback: I monitored test sessions and gathered input from
both customers and support agents on ease of use, clarity, and overall efficiency.

Result:

🔹 Reduced average call resolution time by 30%, as agents could visually guide customers instead of
lengthy verbal instructions.
🔹 Increased first-call resolution rate, reducing the need for follow-up calls.
🔹 Improved customer satisfaction scores, as users found the process easier and more efficient.
🔹 The successful pilot led to company-wide adoption of Co-browsing, enhancing digital support
capabilities.

Reflection (What I would do differently):

🔹 Expand testing to mobile users to ensure Co-browsing works seamlessly across devices.
🔹 Integrate chatbot support to provide AI-driven assistance before escalating to human agents.
🔹 Track long-term analytics to measure continued efficiency improvements and identify future
enhancements.

Bias for action

1. Give me an example of a calculated risk that you have taken where speed was critical. What
was the situation and how did you handle it? What steps did you take to mitigate the risk?
What was the outcome? Knowing what you know now, would you have done anything
differently?

Situation:

In my project with Optiom Inc., I was tasked with working on a co-browsing application aimed at
improving the customer service experience. The application would allow Client Care agents to assist
customers in navigating their accounts in real-time during calls. However, the project had a tight two-
week timeline before the app needed to go live, and there were still several critical testing and
development tasks left to complete. This created a significant pressure to deliver the product on time
without sacrificing quality.

Task:

My task was to ensure the co-browsing app was developed, tested, and ready to go live in two weeks.
Given the tight timeline, I had to make a calculated risk by moving forward with development and
testing tasks simultaneously, while still ensuring that the application met all performance, security, and
usability standards.

Actions Taken:

1. Prioritized Testing Focus Areas:

 o I identified key testing areas that were critical to ensuring the app’s core functionality:
screen sharing, responsiveness, and security. I decided to focus on these features first
and test them rigorously, knowing that other non-critical features could be added later if
time allowed.
o To save time, I worked on manual testing for real-time interactions, while automating
basic test cases for regression.
2. Collaborative Work with Developers:
o I collaborated closely with the development team to ensure that we could work in
parallel. The development team continued to work on new features, while I tested each
feature they completed as soon as it was available.
o We held daily stand-ups to track progress, address blockers quickly, and ensure we were
aligned on the app’s requirements.
3. Managed Time Efficiently:
o I used a time-boxing approach for all test sessions, focusing on high-priority
functionality. This allowed me to complete more tests in a shorter period, while
keeping the focus on what mattered most for a successful launch.
o Recognizing the tight timeline, I took the risk of testing some features with limited
user data initially to verify functionality, with plans to test in real-world conditions after
the live deployment.
4. Risk Mitigation Through Parallel Testing:
o I performed parallel testing on different devices and browsers to ensure the app was
compatible across all platforms and that it provided a seamless experience for customers
and agents.
o In case of any critical issues, I had quick access to the development team for fast fixes
to avoid delays.

Results:

✅ The co-browsing app went live on time, and the Client Care team was able to assist customers
effectively in real-time, improving overall customer satisfaction.
✅ By focusing on the critical areas first, we minimized delays and were able to deliver a high-quality
product under time pressure.
✅ Despite the tight schedule, the app performed well in live use, with minimal post-launch issues. The app
significantly improved customer-agent interaction, reducing time to resolve customer queries.

What I Would Do Differently:

 More Comprehensive Planning for Future Projects: If I had more time, I would have spent
more time on user acceptance testing (UAT) before going live, ensuring that the app could
handle a larger number of users in a production environment.
 Earlier Communication with Stakeholders: Given the time constraint, I would ensure that
stakeholders were informed of any testing limitations in advance, to align expectations and
avoid any miscommunications.

This project taught me a lot about working under pressure, prioritizing tasks effectively, and balancing
speed with quality.
 2. Tell me about a time when you worked against tight deadlines and didn't have time to
consider all options before making a decision. How much time did you have? What
approach did you take? What did you learn from the situation?
Situation:

While working on the co-browsing project for Optiom Inc., I faced a situation where we had to meet an
extremely tight deadline for the application to go live. We were given just two weeks to complete the
development and testing phases, which left very little time for thorough analysis or considering multiple
alternatives. The main objective was to ensure that the core functionality of the app—screen sharing
between clients and agents—worked flawlessly before going live.

Task:

My task was to ensure that the app was fully functional and ready for deployment within the short time
frame. However, with so little time, I had to make quick decisions about which testing areas were most
critical and which features could be deferred or tested later.

Actions Taken:

1. Prioritized Critical Features:

o With the deadline in mind, I focused on the most essential features—screen sharing,
security, and responsiveness—understanding that these would be the most impactful to
users. I decided to skip less critical functionalities that could be fixed after the app went
live if necessary.
o I worked closely with the development team to get daily updates on features that were
still in progress, ensuring that we tested those as soon as they were ready.
2. Utilized Parallel Testing and Development:
o Knowing time was limited, I worked in parallel with the development team: while
they were working on the latest features, I would start testing completed components
immediately. This allowed us to maximize time by not waiting for full development to
finish before starting testing.
3. Minimized Testing Scope:
o Given the time crunch, I opted to test in smaller, manageable chunks instead of
attempting full system integration testing. I focused on making sure that the core
functionality worked flawlessly while deferring non-essential tests.
4. Made Quick Decisions Based on Available Information:
o Due to the constraints, I had to make several quick decisions without considering all
possible options, such as deferring full regression testing and going with the
assumption that new features would not impact existing ones. I communicated the
risks of this decision to stakeholders and had them approve my approach.

Results:

✅ Despite the lack of time to fully explore all options, the app went live on schedule and met key
performance expectations, allowing the client care agents to assist customers effectively through the co-
browsing feature.
✅ The app performed well post-launch with minimal issues, and I was able to complete additional testing
for non-essential features after the initial deployment.

What I Learned:
  Prioritization and Risk Management: This experience taught me the importance of
prioritizing core tasks under time pressure and taking calculated risks to ensure that the most
crucial components are ready in time.
 Communication is Key: I learned that it’s vital to communicate the risks of not considering
all options to stakeholders so that everyone is aligned on what was prioritized and why.
 Time Management: I realized that having a strong time management system in place, such as
working in parallel with teams, could help minimize delays and maximize productivity when
time is limited.

3. Describe a situation where you made an important business decision without consulting
your manager. What was the situation and how did it turn out?

Situation:

While working at GardaWorld as a Control Room Officer, I encountered a critical security issue
during a late-night shift. The front gate at the facility remained stuck open and was not closing,
creating a potential security vulnerability. Given the sensitivity of the site, an open gate posed a
significant risk, as it could allow unauthorized access.

Task:

My responsibility was to ensure the site remained secure while also maintaining smooth operations for
employees arriving or leaving. I attempted to contact the on-call manager, but since it was very late at
night, I was unable to reach them for immediate guidance.

With security at risk, I had to make an immediate decision on how to secure the gate and prevent
unauthorized access.

Actions Taken:

1. Attempted Standard Procedures First:

o I checked the gate control panel for any possible resets or troubleshooting instructions,
but there was no documentation available on how to manually close the gate.

2. Took Initiative to Manually Secure the Gate:

o Since I couldn't leave the gate open overnight, I opened the gate’s control panel and
analyzed its mechanical components.
o Using logical troubleshooting, I identified a manual override mechanism and was able
to successfully close the gate manually to restore security.

3. Implemented Additional Security Measures:

o To further secure the site, I placed reflective obstacles near the gate to direct traffic
away from the affected entrance.
o I coordinated with the Gate Guard to divert all incoming and outgoing traffic
through an alternative gate and ensured that employees were informed about the
situation.
 4. Communicated with Stakeholders & Logged the Issue:
o I notified employees about the issue, assuring them that the security team was handling it
and thanking them for their cooperation.
o I created a detailed incident report and submitted a ticket to the maintenance team so
the issue could be addressed the next day.

Results:

✅ Successfully secured the site by manually closing the gate, preventing any security breaches.
✅ Maintained traffic flow by rerouting vehicles through an alternative entrance, minimizing disruption
to operations.
✅ Effectively communicated with employees, ensuring awareness of the issue while keeping security
intact.
✅ The next morning, the maintenance team fixed the gate, restoring normal operations without any
incidents.

What I Learned:

 Taking initiative in critical situations is necessary when security is at risk.

 Even when documentation is unavailable, logical troubleshooting and hands-on problem-solving
can lead to effective solutions.
 Communication with security personnel and employees is key to managing unexpected
challenges smoothly.

4. Tell me about a time when you had to gather information and respond immediately to a
situation. What was the outcome? Would you have done anything differently?

Situation:

While working as a Security Supervisor at GardaWorld, I was managing security operations at a high-
security site. One day, an incident occurred where a contractor attempted to move from the Red Zone to
the Yellow Zone without proper screening. The contractor left the CICO (Check-In/Check-Out) area
without going through the mandatory screening procedure. This breach could potentially compromise the
security of the site, and I had to respond immediately.

Task:

My task was to immediately address the breach by locating the individual, ensuring that no
unauthorized items or devices were taken from the Red Zone, and investigating the situation to determine
if there was any malicious intent or security risk. I also needed to document the incident and report it to
the on-call DSM for further action.

Actions Taken:

1. Immediate Response and Dispatch:

o As soon as I was made aware of the situation, I dispatched a security guard to locate
the contractor and bring him back to the CICO mantrap area for screening. This was
 essential to ensure that the individual did not attempt to leave with any sensitive
information or devices.
2. Used Cameras for Surveillance:
o I immediately monitored the security camera feeds to track the contractor’s movements
and identify all areas he might have accessed after leaving the Red Zone. I also analyzed
the camera footage to ensure he didn’t take anything unauthorized.
3. On-Site Investigation:
o After the contractor was located and returned to the CICO area, I had the guard
investigate every room the contractor had entered to ensure no devices or security
equipment had been taken or hidden. This thorough search was crucial to ensure the
integrity of the facility wasn’t compromised.
4. Incident Reporting and Communication:
o After completing the investigation, I created a detailed incident report, outlining the
entire sequence of events. I then reported the situation to the on-call DSM along with the
findings from the investigation.
o During the investigation, I discovered that the contractor was not fully aware of the
screening procedures when leaving the Red Zone, which led to the breach.

Results:

✅ The breach was contained quickly and efficiently, with no sensitive information or devices taken from
the Red Zone.
✅ The contractor was safely returned to the CICO area, where the appropriate screening was conducted,
ensuring no further risks.
✅ I provided a thorough incident report to the on-call DSM, which helped clarify the situation and
allowed them to adjust training or procedures if necessary.
✅ The contractor’s misunderstanding of the screening process was addressed, and additional training was
provided to ensure there would be no repeat of the incident.

What I Learned:

 The importance of clear procedures and training: This incident highlighted the need for
ongoing training for all contractors and staff about security protocols. A lack of awareness can
lead to unintended breaches.
 The value of quick decision-making and communication: Responding quickly and efficiently
in a high-pressure situation helped mitigate potential risks. Clear communication with the on-
call DSM and security team was vital in resolving the situation without further incident.
 Thorough documentation is key: Creating a detailed incident report ensured that all information
was accurately recorded and available for future reference, contributing to transparency and
accountability in the security process.

5. Give me an example of when you had to make an important decision and had to decide
between moving forward or gathering more information. What did you do? What was the
outcome? What information is necessary for you to have before acting?
Situation:

During the Estimation Tool project at Optiom Inc., I was performing testing on the tool, which was
designed to help the Client Care team efficiently process policy transfers and cancellations. While
conducting my tests, I discovered a critical bug that could potentially affect the calculation logic for
refunds and cancellations. This issue, if not addressed, could lead to major discrepancies in refund
amounts and cancellation processing, which would directly impact the company’s ability to serve
customers accurately.
Given the time constraints, the Product Manager gave me the green signal to proceed with a
conditional QA sign-off, meaning that I could sign off on the project with the condition that the bug
would be fixed in a future release. However, I knew that this decision needed to be carefully considered,
so I took the time to explain the potential long-term impact of this issue to the Business Analyst (BA)
and Developer.

Task:

My task was to decide how to approach the critical bug—whether to approve the sign-off with the
condition or to insist on addressing the bug before moving forward. I needed to communicate the
potential impact of the bug clearly, especially since time was constrained and the tool was due for
release soon. My goal was to ensure that the company’s operations wouldn’t be compromised by
proceeding with a known issue.

Actions Taken:

1. Thorough Analysis of the Bug's Impact:

o I thoroughly tested the application and documented the bug with screenshots, showing
exactly where and how the issue would cause discrepancies in the refund and cancellation
processes. The bug was related to calculation errors, which would result in incorrect
refund amounts being issued to customers, thus potentially leading to financial losses for
the company and a loss of trust from customers.
o I analyzed the long-term consequences of releasing the tool with this issue unresolved. I
realized that while we could technically release the tool with the conditional sign-off, the
issue could result in customer dissatisfaction and potentially costly errors that would
need to be fixed later.
2. Communicating with Stakeholders:
o I immediately raised the concern with the Product Manager, Business Analyst, and
Developer, explaining the critical nature of the bug. I highlighted the impact it would
have on the business, particularly in terms of refund discrepancies and customer trust.
o I shared the screenshot results, which clearly demonstrated how the bug would affect
the tool’s functionality and the potential risks involved in proceeding without addressing
it.
3. Collaborative Decision Making:
o After a discussion, I emphasized that the issue was non-trivial and that allowing it to go
live could result in customer complaints, financial discrepancies, and reputational damage
to the company.
o We agreed to prioritize the fix for the bug before proceeding further. The team was able
to find a quick workaround to address the issue without delaying the entire release,
ensuring that the tool would be both functional and reliable for the Client Care team.
4. Follow-up and Documentation:
o I ensured that the issue was logged for future reference and worked closely with the
developer to implement a patch. I also made sure that the issue was properly
documented, so it would not resurface unnoticed in future releases.
o I communicated the resolution and testing updates to the stakeholders to ensure
alignment on the final version of the tool.
Results:

✅ The decision to address the bug before the release ensured that the refund and cancellation
calculations were accurate, preventing potential financial errors and customer dissatisfaction.
✅ By taking the time to explain the risks and provide evidence through screenshots and testing results, I
was able to ensure that the team understood the full scope of the issue and acted accordingly.
✅ The release went smoothly, and the tool was able to provide the Client Care team with the necessary
accuracy for processing refunds and cancellations, maintaining operational efficiency and reducing the
risk of financial discrepancies.
✅ Ultimately, the team appreciated the decision, and the tool’s reputation was intact, avoiding the long-
term damage that could have arisen if the issue was ignored.

What I Learned:

 Taking the time to analyze and communicate the risks clearly with stakeholders is essential,
especially when making decisions under time pressure.
 Thorough documentation and evidence (such as screenshots and test results) play a key role in
making sure that everyone is aligned and understands the severity of an issue.
 While the conditional sign-off might seem like a quick solution, addressing critical bugs before
release is always the best course of action to avoid future problems and maintain the company’s
reputation.

6. Tell me about a time when you saw an issue that would impact your team and took a
proactive approach to solve it. What was the issue? What did you do and what was the
outcome? What did you learn from this situation?
Situation:

While working as a Security Supervisor at GardaWorld, I noticed an issue that was affecting the patrol
completion rate for the site. By halfway through each shift, the team was failing to meet the required
number of patrols, which was creating security gaps and failing to meet client expectations. This was a
recurring issue that was causing delays in our operations and could have compromised the safety and
security of the premises.

Task:

My task was to identify the root cause of the issue and come up with a proactive solution to ensure that
the patrols were being completed on time, without compromising the quality of security. I needed to
resolve the issue quickly to restore the team's efficiency and meet the client's expectations.

Actions Taken:

1. Identifying the Cause of the Issue:

o I began by having one-on-one discussions with both the internal and external patrollers
to understand their concerns and identify what was causing the delays.
o Through these discussions, I discovered that there were communication gaps and time
clashes in the patrol schedule. The patrollers were not always clear on when they were
supposed to start or finish their rounds, and there was no clear coordination between the
 guards covering different areas. Additionally, there were instances where some guards
were distracted by other tasks, which led to delays in completing the patrols on time.
2. Creating a Structured Patrol Schedule:
o To resolve the issue, I created a weekly patrol schedule that clearly outlined the timing
and order of patrols for each position. This schedule was shared with all the guards to
ensure that there was no confusion or overlap in patrol responsibilities.
o I made sure that the schedule also accounted for potential breaks or downtimes, so the
guards had enough time to complete their rounds without feeling rushed.
3. Improved Communication and Accountability:
o I set up regular briefings to ensure that all patrollers were aligned on their schedules and
expectations for the day.
o I also encouraged open communication among the team, making sure that any potential
issues or delays could be quickly flagged and addressed before they impacted the overall
patrol completion.
o To keep the guards focused and engaged, I introduced routine check-ins to monitor
progress and keep track of completed patrols.
4. Monitoring and Adjusting as Necessary:
o After implementing the new schedule, I closely monitored the completion rate of patrols
over the next few shifts.
o I took note of any areas where improvements were needed and worked with the team to
make small adjustments to further enhance efficiency.

Results:

✅ As a result of the structured patrol schedule, the team was able to complete all required patrols on
time, significantly improving the overall security coverage for the site.
✅ The improved communication between internal and external patrollers resulted in a more coordinated
approach to patrols, reducing confusion and enhancing team collaboration.
✅ Client satisfaction increased, as the guards were able to meet their patrol targets consistently, fulfilling
the client's needs and expectations.
✅ The team felt more empowered and accountable, and morale improved as they were better equipped to
perform their duties without confusion or stress.

What I Learned:

 Proactive problem-solving requires understanding the root cause of the issue rather than just
addressing the symptoms.
 Clear communication and proper scheduling are key to ensuring that teams are aligned and
tasks are completed efficiently.
 Regular feedback and adjustments are important to ensure that the solution continues to work
effectively in the long term.
 Team collaboration and open channels of communication create a more effective and motivated
workforce.

Earn Trust

1. Tell me about a time when you had to communicate a change in direction that you
anticipated people would have concerns with. What did you do to understand the concerns
and mitigate them? Were there any changes you made along the way after hearing these
 concerns? How did you handle questions and/or resistance? Were you able to get people
comfortable with the change?
Situation:

During my time as a QA Analyst at Optiom Inc., we were testing the Estimation Tool used to calculate
transfer credits and cancellation refunds. Initially, we followed a manual testing approach, but due to
tight deadlines and an increasing number of test scenarios, I proposed a shift toward automating
critical test cases.

I anticipated resistance from the QA team and stakeholders, as:

✔ The QA team was unfamiliar with automation and concerned about a learning curve.
✔ The Product Owner and Business Team were worried that shifting to automation could delay the
release schedule.
✔ The Developers questioned whether automation would truly save time within the project
constraints.

Task:

1. Effectively communicate the change to ensure buy-in from all teams.

2. Address concerns about automation adding complexity or delaying testing.
3. Implement automation selectively to balance speed and accuracy.

Actions Taken:

1️⃣ Presented a Data-Backed Justification for the Change

✅ Analyzed past test execution times and showed that manual testing took 5+ hours per cycle, while
automation could cut this down by 40-50% for regression testing.
✅ Demonstrated that high-risk financial calculations (refunds and transfer credits) were prone to errors
and could benefit from automated validation.
✅ Highlighted that by automating 30-40% of test cases, we could focus manual efforts on complex
scenarios and edge cases.

2️⃣ Addressed Concerns Proactively

✅ For the QA Team:
🔹 Organized a hands-on workshop to introduce simple automation scripts, showing that it was not
replacing manual testing but enhancing efficiency.
🔹 Created a hybrid testing plan, where critical paths were automated, and business logic scenarios
were manually tested.

✅ For Business and Product Owners:

🔹 Assured them that UAT (User Acceptance Testing) would remain manual, keeping business
validation in their control.
🔹 Provided an impact analysis showing that automation would not delay the release but reduce testing
time for future updates.

✅ For Developers:
🔹 Addressed concerns about integration by ensuring that automation focused only on end-user
workflows, without adding extra burden to the development team.
3️⃣ Implemented a Phased Approach
✅ Started by automating 10% of high-priority test cases for refunds and transfer calculations.
✅ Allowed the team to assess the benefits before committing to full automation.
✅ Gathered feedback from QA, Business, and Dev teams after the initial automation cycle.

Results:

✅ The QA team adopted automation, reducing regression testing time from 5 hours to 2.5 hours per
cycle.
✅ Stakeholders became comfortable with automation as they saw no negative impact on release
timelines.
✅ Future releases became more efficient, as automated scripts handled repetitive tests, allowing
manual testers to focus on high-risk scenarios.
✅ Developers saw fewer defects post-release, as automated checks caught issues earlier.

Lessons Learned:

🔹 Change should be gradual—starting small and proving value helps gain acceptance.
🔹 Addressing concerns upfront builds trust and reduces resistance.
🔹 Stakeholder-specific communication is key—each group had different concerns, so I tailored my
approach to meet their needs.

What I Would Do Differently:

✔ Introduce automation discussions earlier in the project to reduce last-minute resistance.

✔ Involve QA team members in automation planning from the start to increase ownership.
✔ Create a structured automation roadmap, so future test cases could be seamlessly integrated.

2. Give me an example of a tough or critical piece of feedback you received. What was it and
what did you do about it?
Situation:

While working at GardaWorld as a Control Room Officer, we were responsible for securing a high-
priority AWS data center with a 500,000 sq. ft. perimeter and over 150+ security cameras monitoring
different access points.

One night, management conducted an unannounced security audit by deploying an individual

dressed in black outside the fence line to test our surveillance effectiveness.

Several factors made this test challenging:

✔ Heavy fog reduced visibility to less than 20 meters.
✔ Frost and snow buildup on 30% of cameras obstructed clear footage.
✔ Temperature was -25°C, impacting equipment performance.

Unfortunately, the intruder remained undetected for 30 minutes until our mobile patrol unit’s vehicle
headlights illuminated the individual while performing a routine drive along the perimeter.
Task:

1. Ensure 100% detection of unauthorized individuals, regardless of weather conditions.

2. Identify gaps in our monitoring system and implement necessary improvements.
3. Address management's critical feedback and strengthen security measures.

Action Taken:

1️⃣ Immediate Incident Review & Response

✅ Conducted a detailed review of security footage and identified the main issue—snow and ice were
obstructing key cameras, reducing effectiveness by 40%.
✅ Reviewed foot patrol and mobile patrol logs to determine why detection was delayed.

2️⃣ Improving Surveillance for Low-Visibility Conditions

✅ Increased manual camera checks from every 4 hours to every 2 hours during extreme weather to
ensure clear visibility.
✅ Implemented a dedicated snow-removal process for cameras – assigned one guard per shift to
manually clear snow buildup on cameras covering critical access points.
✅ Introduced thermal imaging sweeps during foggy nights, increasing detection accuracy by 80%.

3️⃣ Enhancing Fence Line Security & Patrol Coordination

✅ Implemented spotlight sweeps every 30 minutes along the 2.5 km perimeter to improve visibility in
foggy conditions.
✅ Revised the patrol schedule, ensuring that each area of the site was covered at least once every 15
minutes.

4️⃣ Team Awareness & Communication Improvements

✅ Conducted a security refresher training for all 25+ control room officers and patrol guards,
focusing on low-visibility surveillance techniques.
✅ Created a weather-based security SOP, ensuring all shifts were prepared for fog, heavy snow, and
other extreme conditions.

Results:

✅ Detection time improved from 30 minutes to under 5 minutes in all subsequent security tests.
✅ Incident response times improved by 60%, reducing security risks for the data center.
✅ No further undetected breaches, as thermal imaging and new patrol schedules significantly
enhanced detection accuracy.
✅ Positive feedback from management, acknowledging our team's quick adaptation and
implementation of effective countermeasures.

Lessons Learned:

🔹 Regular camera maintenance is critical – We should have ensured that all cameras were clear of
frost and snow before the incident.
🔹 Surveillance should be adjusted based on weather conditions – Thermal cameras, spotlight
sweeps, and closer patrol intervals are essential in low-visibility environments.
🔹 Communication between the control room and patrol teams is key – If the mobile patrol team was
alerted earlier, detection could have been 15-20 minutes faster.
 3. Describe a time when you needed to influence a peer who had a differing opinion about a
shared goal. What did you do? What was the outcome?
Situation:

While working as a QA Analyst at Optiom Inc., I was responsible for testing the Estimation Tool,
which calculated policy transfer credits and cancellation refunds. During testing, I identified multiple
defects related to incorrect refund calculations. However, one of the senior developers rejected my
defect reports, stating that the system was working as intended based on their interpretation of the
business rules.

Since QA and Development shared the goal of delivering an accurate and reliable Estimation Tool, I
needed to influence the developer to acknowledge the defects and make the necessary fixes—without
escalating the issue immediately to management.

Task:

1. Ensure the developer understood the issue by demonstrating the incorrect refund calculations.
2. Align on business requirements by collaborating with stakeholders.
3. Convince the developer to prioritize fixing the defects without causing friction.

Actions Taken:

1️⃣ Gathered Concrete Evidence

✅ Created detailed defect reports with before-and-after calculations showing discrepancies.
✅ Attached screenshots and test data proving that refund calculations were off by 8-12% in specific
scenarios.
✅ Compared the system’s output with real customer refund cases provided by the Client Care team.

2️⃣ Brought in a Neutral Expert for Clarification

✅ Scheduled a brief meeting with the Business Analyst (BA) to clarify the correct refund calculation
formula.
✅ Highlighted that the system’s logic did not match the business rules outlined in the requirements.
✅ Ensured that the BA provided a clear confirmation, making it easier for the developer to see the issue.

3️⃣ Used a Collaborative Approach Instead of Confrontation

✅ Instead of insisting that the defect was valid, I asked open-ended questions to let the developer re-
evaluate the logic:

 “Can we walk through the calculation together using a real policy case?”
 “If we apply the refund formula for backdated policies, does the output align with expectations?”
✅ Framed the conversation as solving a shared problem rather than placing blame.

4️⃣ Provided an Alternative Solution to Reduce Rework

✅ Suggested a small code tweak to correct the logic without major refactoring, making the fix more
acceptable.
✅ Proposed a peer review session where another developer could verify the calculations.
Results:

✅ The developer acknowledged the defect after reviewing the test cases and business rules.
✅ The incorrect refund logic was fixed within 24 hours, ensuring policyholders received the correct
reimbursements.
✅ Improved collaboration between QA and Development, reducing future defect disputes by 30%
through clearer defect documentation.
✅ Strengthened trust with the developer, leading to faster defect resolution in future releases.

Lessons Learned:

🔹 Data-driven arguments are more persuasive than subjective opinions.

🔹 Collaboration works better than confrontation—by involving the BA and focusing on facts, I
avoided unnecessary conflicts.
🔹 Providing a solution instead of just pointing out problems makes it easier to gain buy-in.

What I Would Do Differently:

✔ Align with developers earlier by discussing potential edge cases before testing starts.
✔ Use automation for key calculations to catch issues sooner and provide instant proof of defects.
✔ Improve documentation clarity so business rules are well-defined upfront, reducing
misunderstandings.

4. Give me an example of a time when you were not able to meet a commitment. What was the
commitment and what were the obstacles that prevented success? What was the impact to
your customers/peers and what did you learn from it?
Situation:

While working at GardaWorld as a Security Supervisor at an AWS data center, we had a strict
requirement from the client to complete 630 minutes (10.5 hours) of external patrols within each 12-
hour shift.

One particular night, extreme weather conditions created significant challenges:

✔ Heavy fog with visibility reduced to less than 10 meters.
✔ High winds reaching speeds of 50-60 km/h.
✔ Temperature of -30°C with wind chill, increasing the risk of frostbite.

Due to these dangerous conditions, my team of 4 patrol officers struggled to complete the required
patrol minutes, as prolonged exposure posed serious safety risks.

Task:

1. Ensure external patrols were completed while prioritizing the safety of my team.
2. Communicate with the client regarding the impact of extreme weather on patrol execution.
3. Find an alternative solution to maintain site security despite reduced outdoor patrols.
Action Taken:

1️⃣ Immediate Risk Assessment & Decision-Making

✅ Conducted a safety check to evaluate how long patrol officers could be exposed outside without health
risks.
✅ Determined that each officer could only complete 10-15 minutes per patrol round before needing to
return indoors to prevent frostbite.
✅ Informed my team to reduce exposure time and increase indoor monitoring frequency.

2️⃣ Client Communication & Justification

✅ Contacted the on-call site manager and explained the severe weather conditions with real-time
weather reports and live camera footage.
✅ Clearly outlined the safety risks and justified the reduction in outdoor patrols for the shift.
✅ Suggested an alternative plan:
🔹 Increase camera monitoring by 50% to compensate for reduced patrol time.
🔹 Mobile patrol vehicle surveillance every 30 minutes instead of extended foot patrols.
🔹 Deploy extra lighting in key areas to improve visibility despite the fog.

3️⃣ Adjusting Security Protocols to Maintain Site Safety

✅ Increased the control room’s monitoring focus on high-risk zones using 120+ cameras across the
facility.
✅ Coordinated with the mobile patrol team to ensure that at least one patrol vehicle was checking
external areas every 30 minutes.
✅ Conducted randomized shorter patrols instead of continuous walks, balancing safety with coverage.

Results:

✅ Despite the reduced patrol time (achieving only 420 minutes out of the required 630 minutes), no
security breaches or incidents occurred during the shift.
✅ The client accepted the justification after reviewing the weather conditions and our compensatory
measures (increased camera monitoring and vehicle patrols).
✅ Zero injuries or frostbite cases among officers, ensuring safety was prioritized without compromising
security.
✅ The approach was later incorporated into the site’s extreme weather SOP, improving long-term
operations.

Impact & Lessons Learned:

🔹 Commitments may need to be adjusted when safety is at risk – It’s crucial to communicate with
stakeholders early and provide solutions.
🔹 Having contingency plans for extreme weather ensures that security is not compromised even when
standard procedures cannot be followed.
🔹 Data-backed justification (weather reports, footage, and patrol records) is key to gaining client
trust when commitments cannot be fully met.

What I Would Do Differently:

✔ Proactively request pre-approval for extreme weather adjustments so the client is informed before
an incident occurs.
✔ Suggest investing in heated security shelters at key patrol points, allowing officers to take breaks
without returning inside.
✔ Work with the client to explore thermal camera enhancements for low-visibility conditions, reducing
reliance on physical patrols.

5. Tell me about a time when your team’s goals were out of alignment with another team you
relied on in order to meet your goal. How did you work with the other team? Were you able
to achieve your goals?
Situation:

While working as a Security Supervisor at GardaWorld, my team was responsible for conducting
external patrols and monitoring CCTV cameras at a critical data center for an AWS client. Our goal
was to ensure that all perimeter security checks were completed as per the Service Level Agreement
(SLA), which required a minimum of 630 minutes (10.5 hours) of external patrols per 12-hour shift.

However, we faced a major misalignment with the Snow Removal Team during the winter months.
Their snow-clearing operations often took place during peak patrol hours, blocking key patrol routes
and creating temporary blind spots in security coverage. Additionally, the snowplows frequently kicked
up snow onto cameras and sensors, reducing visibility and causing false intrusion alarms.

This misalignment increased security risks and put our SLA compliance at risk, making it crucial to
coordinate operations without compromising security.

Task:

1. Ensure my security team met the 630-minute patrol requirement despite weather and
operational disruptions.
2. Work with the Snow Removal Team to adjust their clearing schedules to minimize security
disruptions.
3. Maintain compliance with the AWS client’s strict security protocols while ensuring safe and
effective snow removal.

Actions Taken:

1️⃣ Data-Driven Discussion with the Snow Removal Team

✅ Collected patrol logs from the past 7 days, showing that due to snow-clearing operations, external
patrols were falling short by 120+ minutes per shift (nearly 20% below the SLA requirement).
✅ Pulled CCTV footage proving that blown snow from plows covered cameras, reducing visibility by
40% in critical areas.
✅ Gathered intrusion alarm reports, showing a 15% spike in false alarms due to snow covering motion
sensors.

2️⃣ Revised Scheduling Through Cross-Team Collaboration

✅ Scheduled a joint meeting with the Snow Removal Supervisor and AWS Site Manager to discuss
security risks and find a workable solution.
✅ Proposed a time-blocking system, where major snow-clearing operations would happen outside peak
security patrol hours (10 PM - 2 AM) to avoid patrol disruptions.
✅ Established a real-time communication system using radios so that the Snow Removal Team could
inform security officers before entering restricted areas.

3️⃣ Implemented a Temporary Security Contingency Plan

✅ Adjusted patrol routes to avoid freshly plowed areas where visibility was compromised.
✅ Increased CCTV monitoring during active snow removal, assigning an officer to track affected
zones.
✅ Requested additional heating and anti-icing measures to prevent camera obstructions in high-risk
areas.

Results:

✅ Increased patrol compliance from 78% to 98% within 2 weeks, ensuring the AWS SLA
requirement of 630 minutes per shift was met.
✅ The Snow Removal Team agreed to prioritize clearing patrol routes first, reducing delays by 30%.
✅ Reduced false intrusion alarms by 15%, improving security response efficiency.
✅ Strengthened the relationship between Security and Snow Removal Teams, leading to better
coordination during future snowfalls.

Lessons Learned:

🔹 Proactive communication between teams can prevent misalignment before it becomes a problem.
🔹 Using data (logs, footage, reports) strengthens your argument and makes it easier to negotiate
solutions.
🔹 Compromise is key—by adjusting both security patrol schedules and snow removal timing, we found a
win-win solution.

What I Would Do Differently:

✔ Establish cross-team coordination earlier to avoid conflicts rather than reacting to them.
✔ Use a shared scheduling system where both teams can plan their tasks with full visibility of each
other’s priorities.
✔ Implement pre-scheduled patrol adjustments during heavy snowfalls to maintain full security
coverage.

6. Tell me about a time when you uncovered a significant problem in your team. What was it
and how did you communicate it to your manager and other stakeholders? What did you do
to address the problem? How did you manage the impact of this problem for the rest of
your team?
Situation:

While working as a QA Analyst on the Estimation Tool project at Optiom Inc., I noticed a critical
issue—the development team was frequently rejecting defects that I reported. Over 30% of defects
were being marked as “Not a Bug” or “Working as Designed”, despite clear discrepancies in refund
calculations and transfer credit logic.
This was a major problem because:
✔ It led to delays in bug fixes, impacting the testing schedule.
✔ Some rejected defects were actually critical issues, which could cause incorrect refund amounts for
customers.
✔ The QA team was losing valuable time revalidating and reopening defects instead of focusing on
new testing.

Task:

1. Uncover the root cause of why defects were being rejected.

2. Communicate the issue to the development team, product owner, and stakeholders.
3. Ensure proper defect resolution to maintain the project timeline and quality.

Action Taken:

1️⃣ Analyzed the Defect Rejections

✅ Reviewed the last 50 rejected defects to identify common trends.
✅ Found that 70% of rejections were due to misalignment between QA test cases and developer
interpretations of business logic.
✅ Discovered that some defects were rejected because developers assumed different refund calculation
rules than what the business actually required.

2️⃣ Escalated the Issue with Data

✅ Compiled a detailed report with real examples showing:
🔹 Rejected defects that were actually valid issues.
🔹 The financial impact of incorrect calculations on customer refunds (e.g., miscalculations could lead to
5-10% incorrect refunds).
✅ Presented the report to the QA Manager, Development Lead, and Product Owner in a cross-team
meeting.
✅ Highlighted the business risks of releasing the tool with unaddressed issues.

3️⃣ Proposed a New Defect Review Process

✅ Suggested joint QA-Dev reviews before rejecting defects—ensuring both sides agreed on the issue
before closing it.
✅ Arranged weekly bug triage meetings with developers, the product owner, and SMEs to discuss
complex defects.
✅ Created a Defect Rejection Template requiring developers to provide detailed explanations and
supporting evidence when rejecting a defect.

4️⃣ Worked Closely with Developers to Improve Understanding

✅ Conducted a 1-hour workshop with the development team explaining:
🔹 How refund and transfer credit calculations worked from a business perspective.
🔹 Why certain defects were valid and should be addressed.
✅ Encouraged collaboration instead of blame, ensuring that both teams worked towards a common goal
—delivering a high-quality product.
Results:

✅ Defect rejection rate dropped from 30% to less than 10% within the next two sprints.
✅ The resolution time for defects improved by 40%, preventing delays in the testing cycle.
✅ Fewer post-release issues were reported, as all critical defects were properly fixed before deployment.
✅ Improved QA-Dev collaboration, reducing misunderstandings in future projects.

Lessons Learned:

🔹 Data-driven communication helps escalate issues effectively—providing numbers and real-world

impact made stakeholders take the issue seriously.
🔹 Cross-team collaboration is essential to prevent conflicts—QA and developers must work together,
not against each other.
🔹 Clear documentation can prevent future misunderstandings—creating a Defect Rejection Template
ensured that valid bugs were not dismissed without proper justification.

What I Would Do Differently:

✔ Implement bug triage meetings earlier in the project to align expectations.

✔ Ensure developers review business logic documents before starting development, reducing
misunderstandings in requirements.
✔ Use real customer impact scenarios in test cases to better communicate defect severity.

7. Describe a time when you improved morale and productivity on your team. What were the
underlying problems and their causes? How did you prevent them from negatively
impacting the team in the future?
Situation:

As a Security Supervisor at GardaWorld, I was overseeing a night shift team that was responsible for
monitoring the AWS Data Center security and ensuring that all patrols were completed as per client
requirements. Over time, team morale had decreased significantly due to a lack of motivation,
repetitive tasks, and unpredictable weather conditions that made patrols difficult. Additionally, the
winter months brought extra pressure due to the heavy snow and fog, which increased the physical
demands on the team and disrupted patrol schedules.

Task:

My goal was to boost morale, increase productivity, and ensure the team remained focused despite
the challenging weather conditions and heavy workload. This would require addressing the root causes of
stress and burnout and ensuring that our client’s security needs were met without overburdening the
team.

Actions Taken:

1️⃣ Identified the Root Causes of Low Morale

✅ Through one-on-one conversations with team members, I identified key concerns:
  Physical fatigue from extended patrols in poor weather conditions.
 Lack of recognition for their hard work.
 Monotony of tasks with no variety or breaks.

2️⃣ Implemented Schedule Adjustments

✅ Modified the patrol schedule to ensure that no officer worked more than 4 hours at a time without a
15-minute break, ensuring better focus and reducing fatigue.
✅ Adjusted patrol routes to avoid overly demanding or risky areas during extreme weather conditions,
which improved safety and lowered stress levels.

3️⃣ Increased Communication and Team Engagement

✅ Held weekly team huddles to discuss patrol challenges, feedback, and successes. This gave the team
a platform to voice concerns and feel heard.
✅ Acknowledged team achievements publicly during shifts, whether it was completing a tough patrol or
achieving SLA targets (e.g., maintaining 98% compliance with 630-minute patrol requirement).
✅ Gave praise for individual efforts, such as quick thinking during a security breach or unexpected
event, boosting confidence and motivation.

4️⃣ Implemented Training and Career Development

✅ Introduced cross-training on security systems and emergency protocols, so team members felt more
engaged and had more varied responsibilities.
✅ Provided learning opportunities, such as workshops on leadership skills, for those looking to grow
within the company.

5️⃣ Improved Working Conditions During Inclement Weather

✅ Provided heated jackets and weather-resistant gear to ensure comfort during patrols in extreme cold
and fog.
✅ Coordinated with the snow removal team to clear patrol routes in advance, reducing unnecessary
physical strain during snowy conditions.

Results:

✅ Morale improved by 25% as shown in a post-intervention survey, where team members reported
feeling more valued and better supported.
✅ Productivity increased by 15%, as the team was able to complete patrols more efficiently, meeting
98% of required patrol time despite challenging conditions.
✅ The team's job satisfaction significantly improved, with more positive feedback during shift
handovers and fewer complaints.
✅ The improved morale and engagement led to fewer security lapses and more proactive reporting of
potential threats.

Lessons Learned:

🔹 Empathy and communication are crucial for understanding underlying issues within the team.
🔹 Small changes in schedules and recognition can have a big impact on morale and performance.
🔹 Providing variety and training can prevent burnout and encourage career growth within the team.
What I Would Do Differently:

✔ Implement team-building activities outside of the work environment to further strengthen

interpersonal bonds.
✔ Monitor morale regularly through quick feedback loops, especially during high-pressure seasons like
winter.

8. Tell me about a time when a team member was struggling to keep up or fit in and you
stepped in to help out. Why did you think they were struggling or not fitting in? Why did
you decide in step in and support? What did you do to help out? How did it impact your
work? What was the outcome? What did you learn from that situation?
Situation:

While working at Optiom Inc. as a QA Analyst, a new Junior QA was hired to assist with testing the
Estimation Tool for policy transfers and cancellations. His main responsibility was to execute the test
cases that I had created. However, I noticed that he was struggling to understand some of the more
complex test steps, especially those involving:
✔ Backdating policy changes and how they affected premium calculations.
✔ Role-based access testing for different user levels.
✔ Payment adjustments and refund logic in different cancellation scenarios.

Task:

1. Ensure that the Junior QA was properly onboarded and could execute test cases accurately and
efficiently.
2. Reduce delays in testing caused by misunderstandings and misinterpretation of test steps.
3. Maintain the testing timeline and ensure that the Estimation Tool was tested within the project
deadline.

Action Taken:

1️⃣ Conducted a Quick One-on-One Knowledge Transfer

✅ I scheduled 2 short training sessions (45 minutes each) to go over the complex test scenarios step by
step.
✅ Used real examples from the test environment to demonstrate how calculations were derived and
what results were expected.
✅ Explained common mistakes and edge cases, helping him understand how to troubleshoot when
results didn’t match expectations.

2️⃣ Created a Simplified Testing Guide

✅ Documented a 5-page guide that simplified complex test cases into:
🔹 Clear step-by-step instructions for execution.
🔹 Screenshots of expected results to make validation easier.
🔹 Troubleshooting tips for dealing with errors in calculations.
✅ Shared this document with the Junior QA and the entire QA team, improving overall onboarding for
future hires.
3️⃣ Provided Real-Time Support During Testing
✅ For the first 3 days, I reviewed his test results and provided immediate feedback to correct
misunderstandings.
✅ Encouraged him to ask questions and clarified concepts, reducing errors by 60% in his second batch
of test executions.
✅ Checked in with him twice daily to ensure he was comfortable with his progress.

Results:

✅ The Junior QA gained confidence and was able to execute all assigned test cases correctly by the end
of the first week.
✅ Testing efficiency increased by 40%, as fewer errors meant less rework and retesting.
✅ The Estimation Tool was successfully tested and delivered on time without additional QA delays.
✅ My training document became a reference guide for new QA hires, improving onboarding efficiency
in future projects.

Lessons Learned:

🔹 Investing time in team support early on saves time later – The initial training reduced repeated
mistakes and future delays.
🔹 Clear documentation is essential – A structured guide helps new team members adapt quickly.
🔹 Encouraging open communication improves team confidence – The Junior QA was more engaged
and comfortable asking for help, leading to better collaboration.

9. Tell me about a time when a team member was not performing well and impacted your
work. How did you handle that situation? Why were they not performing well? What was
the outcome? What did you learn from that situation?
Situation:

At Optiom Inc., while working as a QA Analyst on the Estimation Tool project, a new Junior QA was
hired to assist with executing test cases I had created. However, after reviewing his initial test results, I
noticed several issues:

✔ Missed critical test steps, especially in refund calculations and backdating scenarios.
✔ Incorrect validation of expected results, leading to 30% of test cases failing due to execution
errors rather than system bugs.
✔ Delays in test execution, affecting the overall testing timeline by nearly 2 days.

The tight project deadline (1 week for testing) meant that delays could impact the on-time delivery of
the Estimation Tool.

Task:

1. Identify why the Junior QA was struggling and find a solution to improve his performance.
2. Ensure that the testing timeline was maintained, despite the initial delays.
3. Help the Junior QA become more effective in his role without taking on all the work myself.
Action Taken:

1️⃣ Identified the Root Cause of the Performance Issue

✅ Had a one-on-one discussion to understand why mistakes were happening.
✅ Discovered that he was overwhelmed by complex test cases and had trouble understanding business
logic behind policy calculations.
✅ Found that he was not using the system logs correctly, leading to misinterpretation of failed test
results.

2️⃣ Implemented a Structured Training and Support Plan

✅ Conducted a hands-on session (1 hour) explaining key testing concepts:
🔹 How to validate refund calculations using real test data.
🔹 How to properly log defects to avoid misreporting system issues.
🔹 How to cross-check expected vs. actual results using SQL queries.
✅ Assigned him simpler test cases first, then gradually moved to more complex ones.
✅ Provided a step-by-step guide with common testing mistakes and solutions.

3️⃣ Closely Monitored His Progress and Provided Real-Time Feedback

✅ Reviewed his test execution for the next 3 days and corrected errors immediately.
✅ Encouraged him to ask questions instead of making assumptions.
✅ Introduced a daily 15-minute sync-up to discuss progress and challenges.

Results:

✅ Execution accuracy improved from 70% to 95% within 5 days.

✅ Testing delays were reduced, and we managed to complete 100% of test cases within the 1-week
deadline.
✅ The Junior QA became more independent, needing 50% less oversight by the second week.
✅ The Estimation Tool was delivered on time, and the Client Care team adopted it successfully
without any post-release issues.

Lessons Learned:

🔹 Early intervention is key – Identifying performance issues early prevents major project delays.
🔹 Proper onboarding makes a big difference – Structured guidance helps new hires ramp up faster.
🔹 Patience and mentorship improve team productivity – Investing time in a struggling team member
pays off in the long run.

What I Would Do Differently:

✔ Implement a QA onboarding checklist for future hires, ensuring they have a structured learning
plan from day one.
✔ Introduce peer shadowing for the first 2 weeks, where new QAs observe and learn from senior team
members before executing test cases independently.
✔ Schedule regular training sessions on complex testing scenarios to ensure new hires feel more
confident in their roles.

Deliver Results
 1. Give me an example of a time when you were able to deliver an important project under a
tight deadline. What sacrifices did you have to make to meet the deadline? How did they
impact the final deliverable? What was the final outcome?

Situation:

At Optiom Inc., I was part of the Estimation Tool project, which was required to be delivered within a
1-month timeline. The breakdown of the timeline was as follows:

 1 week for the Business Analyst (BA) to create user stories and define the requirements.
 2 weeks for the development team to code and build the tool.
 This left me with just 1 week to perform end-to-end testing, UAT, staging, and production
validation.

Given that the Client Care team (handling 50,000+ policy transactions annually) would rely on this
tool for refund calculations and policy transfers, ensuring 100% accuracy under such a tight deadline
was a major challenge.

Task:

My role was to:

1. Thoroughly test the Estimation Tool within a 1-week timeframe, focusing on refund
calculations, transfer credits, and access controls.
2. Ensure no major defects in the production release, as an incorrect refund estimate could result
in financial discrepancies of over $500,000 annually.
3. Coordinate UAT testing with 10+ Client Care representatives, ensuring that all business use
cases were covered.

Actions Taken:

1️⃣ Aggressive Test Planning and Prioritization

✅ Identified and prioritized 50+ critical test cases, focusing on refund calculations, policy transfer
scenarios, and backdating accuracy.
✅ Aligned test cases with business priorities by collaborating with the Product Owner and BA, ensuring
that every essential functionality was tested first.

2️⃣ Parallel Testing in Staging and Production

✅ To maximize efficiency, I ran staging and production tests simultaneously, identifying 5 major
defects early, which could have affected 30% of the refund calculations.
✅ Created a structured defect triaging system, ensuring that high-priority defects were fixed within 24
hours by the development team.

3️⃣ Collaboration with Developers & Business Teams

✅ Maintained a real-time feedback loop with developers, enabling faster bug resolutions—reducing
defect fix times from 48 hours to 12 hours.
✅ Worked closely with the Client Care team (10+ users) during UAT, addressing their concerns
proactively, ensuring a smooth transition to the new system.
4️⃣ Efficient UAT Execution & Test Optimization
✅ Optimized test cases to reduce UAT execution time from 3 days to 1.5 days, ensuring full completion
within the deadline.
✅ Developed a detailed testing documentation (50+ pages) for future use, reducing onboarding time for
new testers by 40%.

Results:

✅ Completed all staging, production, and UAT testing within 5 working days.
✅ Successfully delivered the Estimation Tool on schedule, allowing the Client Care team to process
refunds and transfers 40% faster than before.
✅ Identified and resolved 95% of high-priority defects before production, ensuring a 99.9% accuracy
rate in refund calculations.
✅ The tool was adopted immediately by 50+ Client Care employees, reducing manual effort and
increasing efficiency.

Sacrifices & Lessons Learned:

🔹 I had to work extended hours (12–14 hours per day) during the final testing phase to ensure
comprehensive coverage.
🔹 Focused only on high-risk areas, which meant some low-risk test cases had to be validated post-
release in a controlled manner.
🔹 Lesson Learned: Proactively engaging business stakeholders earlier in the process would have
helped address certain risks sooner.

2. Tell me about a time when you had significant, unanticipated obstacles to overcome in
achieving a key goal. What was the obstacle? Were you eventually successful? Knowing
what you know now, is there anything you would have done differently?

Situation:

During the testing phase of the Estimation Tool project, I encountered a critical issue with refund
calculations—where incorrect refund amounts were being generated due to a business logic flaw.

This was a major obstacle because:

 Incorrect refund calculations could have resulted in $250,000+ in financial discrepancies.

 The product manager approved a conditional QA sign-off, meaning I was under pressure to
approve the release despite known issues.
 The 1-week testing window was already constrained, and identifying a major issue mid-testing
created further delays.

Task:

1. Ensure the bug was properly escalated, fixed, and retested within the remaining 3 days.
2. Balance quality and timeline constraints—ensuring the tool was released on time without
major financial risks.
3. Communicate effectively with stakeholders to manage expectations while finding a solution.
Actions Taken:

1️⃣ Immediate Risk Assessment & Prioritization

✅ Analyzed the defect’s impact and determined it affected 20% of policy refunds, making it a high-
priority fix.
✅ Created a detailed report with screenshots and test data, explaining the risk to the Product Owner,
BA, and development team.

2️⃣ Worked Closely with Development to Fix the Bug Rapidly

✅ Collaborated with the lead developer to isolate the issue in the logic handling policy backdating
scenarios.
✅ Ensured the fix was deployed in staging within 24 hours, allowing time for retesting before UAT
completion.

3️⃣ Stakeholder Communication & Transparency

✅ Held an emergency stakeholder meeting to explain the risk and convince them to delay the
conditional QA sign-off by 12 hours, ensuring a proper fix was verified.
✅ Provided detailed documentation (including test results and risk assessments) to support my
decision.

4️⃣ Final UAT & Quality Assurance Before Deployment

✅ Conducted focused retesting on 50+ refund cases, ensuring accuracy after the fix.
✅ Ran a final role-based access control (RBAC) check to ensure no unauthorized refund modifications
were possible.

Results:

✅ Bug was fixed within 24 hours, and all high-risk refund scenarios were successfully tested before
the final deployment.
✅ Prevented potential refund errors totaling over $250,000, ensuring financial accuracy for
policyholders.
✅ Tool was delivered on time, while maintaining 99.9% accuracy in refund calculations.
✅ Stakeholders praised my proactive decision-making, and my documentation helped streamline
future defect resolution processes.

Lessons Learned & What I Would Do Differently:

🔹 Engage SMEs earlier: Had I involved the finance team during the initial requirement gathering,
this issue might have been caught before the testing phase.
🔹 Preemptively test high-risk scenarios: Prioritizing refund-related test cases earlier in the sprint
could have mitigated late-stage surprises.
🔹 Stay firm on quality, even under pressure: My decision to delay the conditional sign-off ensured we
released a high-quality product, avoiding financial and reputational risks.

3. Tell me about a time when you not only met a goal but considerably exceeded
expectations. How were you able to do it? What challenges did you have to overcome?

Situation:
During my time at Optiom Inc., I was responsible for testing the Estimation Tool, which was designed
to streamline policy transfers and cancellations. My primary goal was to validate the tool’s accuracy
in calculating refunds and transfer credits while ensuring that the system met all business and
compliance requirements before going live.

However, I identified an opportunity to exceed expectations by not only delivering the required testing
but also enhancing the overall testing process through improved documentation and optimization.

Task:

 Complete testing within a strict 1-week timeframe before deployment.

 Ensure 100% accuracy in refund and transfer credit calculations for different policy types
and payment methods to avoid financial discrepancies.
 Identify potential automation and documentation improvements to support future testing and
reduce manual efforts.

Actions Taken:

1. Achieved Testing Goals Efficiently:

o Developed and executed 200+ test cases covering all refund and transfer credit
scenarios.
o Conducted end-to-end testing, ensuring that calculations were accurate from policy
selection to estimation output.
o Identified 5 critical defects related to calculation mismatches and incorrect user
access, preventing potential errors before launch.
2. Exceeded Expectations by Improving Documentation:
o Created a comprehensive Full System Testing Document, covering:
 200+ test scenarios categorized by policy status, payment methods, and
business rules.
 Step-by-step testing instructions, making it easier for new team members to
conduct future testing.
 Guidelines for automation and manual testing to optimize efficiency.
o This documentation reduced the onboarding time for new testers by 50%, ensuring
future teams could ramp up quickly.
3. Optimized Testing Time & Prevented Delays:
o Reduced testing execution time by 30% by optimizing test data and automating
repetitive scenarios.
o Ensured that 100% of critical test cases were executed within the given timeframe,
avoiding last-minute issues during deployment.
o Prevented potential financial discrepancies of up to $500,000 by catching
miscalculations early, ensuring accurate refunds and policy transfer amounts.

Results:

✅ Completed testing 2 days ahead of schedule, ensuring the Estimation Tool was ready for deployment.
✅ Reduced onboarding time for future testers by 50%, thanks to well-structured documentation.
✅ Optimized testing efficiency, cutting execution time by 30%, reducing the overall effort required.
✅ Eliminated major financial risks, ensuring correct refund calculations and compliance with business
rules.
What I Learned:

 Structured documentation can drive long-term efficiency and reduce delays in future
testing cycles.
 Proactively optimizing testing workflows can significantly impact delivery speed and accuracy.
 Balancing speed and thoroughness is key when working under tight deadlines to prevent costly
errors.

4. Tell me about a time when you or your team were more than half way to meeting a goal when
you realized it may not be the right goal or may have unintended consequences. What was the
situation? What did you do? What was the outcome? Looking back, would you have done
anything differently?
Situation:

At Baker Hughes in Calgary, I was leading a project to set up 50 new desktops for three newly
established departments. We were nearly 70% through the deployment, having already configured and
installed operating systems and essential applications for about 35 desktops when we realized a major
issue: the oil and gas drilling applications we had installed were not optimized for the latest Windows
version we had deployed.

Some of the critical drilling simulation tools and monitoring software required for real-time field
operations were showing latency issues and occasional crashes, which could lead to workflow
disruptions for the teams relying on them. The project was on a tight deadline, and we had already
invested considerable time and effort in the current setup.

Task:

I needed to quickly assess whether we should continue with the current approach and troubleshoot as
issues arose or pause the deployment to find a better solution that would ensure smooth operations for
the drilling teams.

Action:

1. Consulted with the project manager and IT team: I gathered real-time performance data
from the 35 deployed desktops and compared it to older systems still in use.
o CPU and memory utilization for these drilling applications had increased by 30%,
causing frequent lag in data processing.
o Some field operators reported delays of 10–15 seconds per command, which could lead
to inefficiencies in decision-making.

2. Tested a rollback strategy: Instead of continuing with the latest OS version, we tested the
applications on a previous stable version that had been used in the past. We found that this older
version reduced software crashes by 80% and restored optimal performance.
3. Revised the deployment plan:
o Halted further installations of the new OS on the remaining 15 desktops.
o Re-imaged and rolled back the OS on the affected 35 desktops, ensuring compatibility
with drilling applications.
 o Worked closely with the software vendor to obtain a patch for the newer OS, but
decided not to rush its deployment until further testing was completed.

4. Completed the project successfully: Despite the delay, we managed to reconfigure all 50
desktops and complete the deployment within one extra week while ensuring that employees
had fully functional systems.

Result:

 100% software compatibility achieved after rollback.

 Zero reported software crashes from users after deployment.
 Improved system performance by reducing CPU overload from 80% down to 50%, ensuring
smoother drilling simulations.
 Saved potential downtime that could have cost the company thousands of dollars in lost
productivity.

Looking Back – What Would I Have Done Differently?

Although the issue was resolved efficiently, I would have:

 Conducted a small-scale pilot test first (deploying 5-10 desktops) before rolling out the setup
for all employees. This would have revealed the compatibility issue earlier and saved at least 3-4
days of extra work.
 Engaged the software vendor earlier in the deployment process to confirm full OS
compatibility.

5. Give me an example of a mission or goal you didn’t think was achievable. What was it and
how did you help your team try to achieve it? Were you successful in the end? Looking
back, would you have done anything differently?

Situation:

At Baker Hughes in Calgary, I was responsible for deploying 50 new desktops for three newly formed
departments. Initially, the timeline given was four weeks, but due to last-minute project adjustments, the
deadline was unexpectedly shortened to two weeks. Given the complexity of the setup—integrating oil
and gas drilling applications, network configurations, and user-specific requirements—I initially thought
this timeline was unrealistic.

Task:

Despite the challenge, my goal was to ensure that all 50 desktops were properly set up, configured, and
ready for use without compromising software compatibility or network security.

Action:

To tackle this, I took the following steps:

 1. Optimized the setup process:
o Instead of setting up desktops one by one, I used disk imaging technology to clone
configurations, reducing setup time per system from 2 hours to 45 minutes.
o Grouped desktops by department needs to streamline software deployment.

2. Worked in parallel with IT and project teams:

o Coordinated with the project manager to identify critical vs. non-critical applications,
so we prioritized the most essential software first.
o Engaged network engineers early to ensure all desktops were added to the network
without delays.

3. Divided tasks among the team:

o While I focused on hardware setup, my colleagues handled network provisioning and
software patching simultaneously.
o Provided a quick training guide for end-users to reduce post-deployment support time.

4. Conducted quick validation testing:

o Instead of waiting until the end, we tested randomly selected systems throughout the
deployment to catch and fix issues early.

Result:

 Successfully deployed all 50 desktops within 13 days—one day ahead of the revised deadline.
 Reduced setup time by 60% using automated imaging.
 Achieved zero post-deployment failures, as all systems were fully operational from day one.
 Received positive feedback from employees and the project manager for an efficient rollout.

Looking Back – What Would I Have Done Differently?

 If I had anticipated the time constraints earlier, I would have requested additional resources
sooner, such as an extra technician, to further optimize the workflow.
 I would have also implemented a pilot setup for a few systems first, allowing us to refine the
process before scaling up to 50.

6. Tell me about a time when you did not effectively manage your projects and something did not
get completed on time. What was the impact? What approaches do you use to make sure you
are focusing on the right deliverables when you have several competing priorities?
Situation:

At Optiom Inc., while working on the Estimation Tool project, I was simultaneously assigned to
another initiative that involved enhancing the policy administration dashboard. Both projects had
overlapping deadlines, and I had to balance testing efforts between the Estimation Tool (affecting 50+
Client Care employees and 50,000+ policy transactions annually) and the Dashboard Enhancement
(used by 200+ employees across departments).

Due to the tight timelines and resource constraints, I initially underestimated the complexity of the
Dashboard Enhancement project. While I focused on completing the Estimation Tool testing on time,
I did not allocate sufficient time to properly validate the dashboard enhancements. As a result, the
Dashboard Enhancement project was delayed by 4 days, impacting the reporting and policy
tracking workflows for business users.

Task:

1. Ensure the timely completion of testing for both projects without compromising quality.
2. Balance testing priorities while working under resource constraints.
3. Improve time management and prioritization skills to avoid delays in future projects.

Actions Taken:

1️⃣ Identified Gaps in Time Estimation & Workload Planning

✅ After realizing that the Dashboard Enhancement project was falling behind, I analyzed my task
distribution and identified that I had allocated 80% of my testing time to the Estimation Tool, leaving
insufficient time for the second project.

2️⃣ Communicated the Delay & Managed Stakeholder Expectations

✅ Informed the Product Owner and Business Analyst of the potential delay 3 days before the
deadline, giving them time to adjust the release schedule.
✅ Proposed a phased rollout approach, where 80% of the dashboard features were released on time,
while the remaining 20% were delivered within the additional 4 days.

3️⃣ Implemented a Prioritization Framework

 Must-Have (Critical functionality tests for both projects)

 Should-Have (High-priority but non-blocking tests)
 Could-Have (Enhancements that could be deferred post-release)
✅ This allowed me to focus on high-impact test cases first, ensuring that key dashboard
functionalities were validated before the delayed release.

4️⃣ Introduced Parallel Testing & Task Delegation

✅ Instead of sequentially testing one project at a time, I switched to a parallel testing approach,
alternating between the two projects.
✅ Requested additional testing support from a junior QA tester, delegating low-risk test cases, which
helped recover 1.5 days of lost time.

Results:

✅ Despite the 4-day delay, the Dashboard Enhancement project was successfully delivered without
major defects.
✅ Implementing parallel testing and delegation improved efficiency, allowing me to complete 100% of
critical test cases within the extended timeframe.
✅ The phased release approach mitigated business impact, allowing 80% of enhancements to go live
on time, ensuring minimal disruption to 200+ employees.

Lessons Learned & What I Would Do Differently:

🔹 Improve Time Estimation – In future projects, I would conduct effort estimation upfront to avoid
underestimating testing timelines.
🔹 Engage Additional Testers Earlier – Bringing in support earlier could have prevented the delay.
🔹 Use Workload Tracking Tools – I started using JIRA dashboards & Kanban boards to better
visualize testing progress across multiple projects.

7. It can be difficult to set goals for a team that are challenging, yet achievable. Tell me about a
time when you hit the right balance. How did you approach setting the goals? What was the
outcome? (Manager)