Strategy question

Several FB users have experienced shopping integrity issues, where the product they received is different and/or much lower quality than expected (i.e., misalignment between product advertised via FB ad and product received). How would you determine if this is a problem worth solving and what product enhancements would you make to address this issue?

Practice this question out loud. An AI interviewer asks it, follows up like a real interviewer would, and scores your answer. Type or speak.

What this question tests

Tests root-cause diagnosis and trust-focused prioritization for a marketplace integrity problem, distinct from a general improve-the-product answer.

Clarify scope: this concerns Facebook Marketplace, where peer sellers list items directly, unlike a vetted retail platform.
Segment the causes: seller misrepresentation (intentional), poor listing quality (photos or descriptions), and buyer expectation mismatch.
Quantify which cause dominates using dispute and report data, since the fix differs for fraud versus honest listing errors.
Propose layered fixes: a seller rating and review system visible before purchase, a structured listing template requiring key details (condition, defects), and a buyer protection or refund mechanism for verified mismatches.
Weigh trust versus friction: too many verification steps discourage casual peer sellers from listing at all.
Define success as a falling shopping integrity complaint rate and stable or growing listing volume.

Separates fraud from honest listing quality issues, since Marketplace is peer-to-peer, unlike a retail platform with vetted sellers.
Proposes a seller reputation system as the core trust mechanism, consistent with how other peer marketplaces (eBay, Airbnb) solve this.
Uses illustrative numbers as assumptions: assume 5% of Marketplace transactions generate an integrity complaint, with photo mismatch as the top cause.
Flags the trust-versus-friction trade-off explicitly, since Marketplace's appeal depends on low listing friction for casual sellers.

Treating Marketplace like a retail platform and proposing solutions that assume Facebook vets sellers, which it doesn't.
Not separating fraud from unintentional listing errors, which need different fixes.
Proposing verification requirements so heavy they'd kill casual peer selling.

How would you detect intentional fraud versus honest mistakes at scale?
What would a buyer protection mechanism look like without Facebook holding funds?
How do you balance trust features against keeping listing friction low?