Strategy question

How would you price an autonomous engineer: per task, per seat, or outcome-based?

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

Pricing strategy for a new category of product where value is delivered by outcomes rather than seats or usage alone.

How to approach it

  1. Lay out the three models: per-task (pay per completed unit of work), per-seat (flat subscription per developer), and outcome-based (pay tied to value delivered, like PRs merged).
  2. Weigh per-task against variability, since task complexity varies wildly, making a flat per-task price hard to set fairly.
  3. Weigh per-seat against usage mismatch, since a light user and a heavy user pay the same, which can undercharge power users.
  4. Weigh outcome-based against measurement difficulty, since defining and verifying 'outcome' for code is harder than for sales or support.
  5. Recommend a hybrid: a base seat fee for access plus usage-based charges for compute-heavy tasks, which balances predictability for buyers with fair value capture.
  6. Note how enterprise buyers, used to per-seat software pricing, may prefer predictability over pure outcome pricing despite its theoretical appeal.

What a strong answer includes

Common mistakes

Likely follow-up questions

More strategy questions

More questions from Cognition

Learn the skill behind it

Chapters of the AI PM course that teach what this question tests.

Preparing for a specific role?

Book summaries for this kind of question

Browse all 4,000+ questions in the bank