Strategy question
Harvey is being pushed to ship new platform capabilities faster, while enterprise customers are escalating concerns about uptime, latency, and trust. As the PM for Core Platform, how would you build a 12-month infrastructure roadmap that balances reliability, performance, security, and feature velocity? Walk through your prioritization framework, the inputs you would use, and how you would handle tradeoffs when these goals conflict.
- Harvey
- Strategy
- Hard
Practice this question out loud. An AI interviewer asks it, follows up like a real interviewer would, and scores your answer. Type or speak.
Start a mock interview on this question · Mock interview from a job description
What this question tests
Tests building a 12-month infrastructure roadmap that explicitly balances reliability, performance, security, and feature velocity under real conflict.
How to approach it
- Gather inputs across four dimensions: open reliability incidents and their customer impact, security review blockers, performance complaints, and pending feature commitments.
- Weight reliability and security issues that are actively blocking renewals or expansions above feature requests with no attached urgency.
- Sequence the first two quarters around closing the highest-impact reliability and security gaps, since enterprise trust erodes fastest from incidents, not slow feature velocity.
- Sequence feature velocity investment in the second half, once the reliability baseline is stable enough that new features do not compound existing risk.
- Use a framework like customer-impact-times-likelihood for reliability and security items, and revenue-times-confidence for feature items, to compare across categories.
- Communicate the sequencing rationale explicitly to stakeholders pushing for faster feature velocity, showing the tradeoff was deliberate, not a default to caution.
What a strong answer includes
- Sequences reliability and security ahead of feature velocity in the first half specifically because enterprise trust erodes fastest from incidents.
- Uses a named comparison framework, impact times likelihood for risk items, revenue times confidence for features, to justify sequencing across categories.
- Communicates the tradeoff rationale to stakeholders pushing for speed, rather than silently deprioritizing their asks.
Common mistakes
- Treating all four dimensions as equally weighted with no real sequencing logic.
- Silently deprioritizing feature requests without explaining the reliability-first rationale to stakeholders.
Likely follow-up questions
- How would you handle a major feature commitment that conflicts with the reliability-first sequencing?
- What would trigger you to revisit the roadmap mid-year?
More strategy questions
- How should Harvey price for law firms vs. in-house legal teams?Harvey · Strategy · Hard
- How would you grow Harvey adoption among conservative, risk-averse law firms?Harvey · Strategy · Hard
- You inherit Vault with strong customer interest but limited engineering capacity. How would you set Vault’s product vision and a 12-month roadmap across file management, AI search/Q&A, document extraction, secure sharing, and platform investments like permissions, indexing, and integrations? Walk through your prioritization framework, major bets, and what you would explicitly defer.Harvey · Strategy · Hard
- Harvey can fund only one major integration track next: deeper iManage support, broader SharePoint coverage, or cross-platform capabilities like sync, permissions mapping, and admin controls. How would you decide what to build first, and what tradeoffs would you make across customer demand, implementation effort, security risk, and strategic leverage?Harvey · Strategy · Hard
- Harvey’s Command Center needs to serve three jobs for enterprise admins: understanding adoption, managing users and access, and enforcing governance. How would you define the product strategy and first 12-month roadmap for Command Center, and what framework would you use to make trade-offs across those three areas for Harvey’s largest legal customers?Harvey · Strategy · Hard
- You inherit a platform where teams lack visibility into request failures, latency regressions, customer-impacting incidents, and model-quality degradation. How would you define the product scope for observability, decide what to ship first, and ensure the work improves customer outcomes rather than just adding internal tooling?Harvey · Strategy · Hard
More questions from Harvey
Learn the skill behind it
Chapters of the AI PM course that teach what this question tests.
- Chapter 4: Discovering and Sizing AI Opportunities
- Chapter 9: Measuring AI Product Economics
- Chapter 14: Interviewing for AI PM Roles