Product design question
How would you improve the fundraiser feature on Facebook?
- Meta
- Product design
- Easy
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 product improvement thinking on a trust-sensitive, emotionally charged feature: can you find concrete friction points without proposing changes that undermine donor or organizer trust.
How to approach it
- Clarify the two sides: fundraiser organizers who want to raise money efficiently and trustworthily, and donors who want confidence their money reaches the stated cause, both of which shape what 'improve' should mean here.
- Identify organizer-side pain points: difficulty communicating fundraiser progress and updates in a way that re-engages past donors, and unclear guidance on what makes a fundraiser description effective at converting viewers to donors.
- Identify donor-side pain points: uncertainty about fund verification and where money actually goes, especially for personal (non-charity) fundraisers, which affects willingness to donate.
- Prioritize a trust-building improvement: clearer verification badges and fund-disbursement transparency (showing how funds were used, especially for medical or emergency fundraisers) to increase donor confidence and conversion.
- Prioritize a re-engagement improvement: automated, easy-to-send progress updates to past donors, since repeat donations from people who already gave once are a high-conversion opportunity often left untapped.
- Define success as donation conversion rate (viewers who donate) and repeat-donor rate for organizers who send progress updates, both tied directly to trust and re-engagement.
What a strong answer includes
- Separates organizer and donor pain points explicitly, since trust concerns and communication gaps affect each side differently.
- Names fund-verification transparency as a concrete trust mechanism, directly relevant to a category (personal fundraisers) known for donor skepticism.
- Proposes a specific re-engagement mechanism (easy progress updates to past donors) rather than a vague 'improve engagement' statement.
- Picks conversion and repeat-donor rate as metrics, directly tied to the trust and re-engagement improvements proposed.
Common mistakes
- Proposing changes that could undermine donor trust, like reducing verification steps purely for organizer convenience.
- Only considering the organizer's experience and ignoring donor trust concerns, a critical factor in fundraiser conversion.
- No metric tied to actual donation behavior, relying on vague engagement terms instead.
Likely follow-up questions
- How would you verify fund usage for personal, non-charity fundraisers without excessive friction?
- How would you handle a fundraiser that appears fraudulent based on user reports?
- How would you measure whether progress updates actually increase repeat donations?
More product design questions
- You’ve just joined Meta and have been tasked with launching a new product to help people at home during emergencies. What would you build?Meta · Product design · Medium
- How would you improve the Facebook Timeline?Meta · Product design · Easy
- Build a volunteer product for Facebook.Meta · Product design · Medium
- Design an application launching in the US marketplace that enables patients to find doctors.Meta · Product design · Hard
- Design a washing machine for Google.Google · Product design · Hard
- How would you make WhatsApp more user-friendly for the elderly to use?Meta · Product design · Medium
More questions from Meta
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 7: AI UX and human oversight: design for a system that is wrong sometimes
- Chapter 14: Get the job: the AI PM interview loop