Strategy question
Harvey is preparing to launch a new agentic AI capability for legal teams in 6 weeks. How would you partner with product, engineering, legal, executives, and go-to-market to shape the announcement? Please cover how you would decide the announcement angle, pressure-test claims, line up proof points and customer evidence, prepare spokespeople, sequence outreach across tech/business/legal media, and manage launch risks if the product details are still moving.
- 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
Cross-functional launch orchestration under time pressure and moving product details: can you shape a credible external narrative while managing real risk of overclaiming.
How to approach it
- Anchor the announcement angle on a defensible, specific customer outcome rather than a broad claim about agentic capability, since legal audiences are skeptical of AI hype.
- Pressure-test every claim against actual eval results and known limitations with product and engineering before it goes into any external material.
- Line up proof points early: at least one or two customer references willing to speak to real usage, since third-party validation matters more than vendor claims in legal AI.
- Prepare spokespeople with a consistent core narrative but different depth: technical detail for tech press, reliability and safety framing for legal and business press.
- Sequence outreach starting with a controlled briefing to trusted legal trade press before broader tech and business coverage, and build in a plan for handling last-minute product changes, like a pre-agreed fallback claim that stays true even if scope shifts.
What a strong answer includes
- Insists on pressure-testing every claim against real eval data, directly addressing the overclaiming risk inherent to legal AI marketing.
- Sequences outreach to legal trade press first, reflecting real understanding of what audience needs to trust the claim most.
- Builds in a fallback plan for last-minute product changes instead of assuming the announcement stays static for six weeks.
Common mistakes
- Focuses on the announcement's reach and excitement without addressing the overclaiming risk specific to legal AI.
- Has no contingency for the product details moving before launch, which the question explicitly flags as a risk.
Likely follow-up questions
- What would you do if engineering tells you a claimed capability is not fully ready two weeks before launch.
- How would you choose which customer reference to feature.
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: Discovery and strategy for AI products
- Chapter 9: Prove it paid off: outcomes, economics, and pricing
- Chapter 14: Get the job: the AI PM interview loop