When asked to prioritize competing requests, first compare consequences, deadlines and dependencies. Do not simply choose the loudest requester or promise to do everything immediately. Explain the decision and communicate what will wait.

These interview questions and answers use a fictional work queue. They ask what you would do, rather than asking you to invent a past achievement.

What is the scenario?

You are preparing a routine report due tomorrow. A colleague requests a new chart for a meeting next week. At the same time, a user reports that a core form cannot be submitted. You have not yet verified the form problem.

The prompt leaves important facts open. You should not label the form report a major incident before checking scope and impact. Equally, you should not ignore it because it arrived after the report task.

Question: what do you do first?

Illustrative answer: “I would quickly establish whether the form issue blocks a critical workflow and how many users are affected. I would follow the team's incident process if the impact warrants it. I would then compare the report deadline and chart request with the verified issue and make the trade-off visible to the responsible owner.”

This answer starts with triage, not a premature technical fix. It also respects decision authority: you may need a manager or incident lead to approve a changed priority.

Question: what information changes the order?

  • Whether the core workflow has a safe workaround.
  • The real deadline and consequence of missing it.
  • Whether another person can handle a task.
  • Dependencies that would block other work.
  • The scope and confidence of the reported problem.

Effort matters too, but a quick task is not automatically the most important. Avoid filling the day with small requests while a consequential issue remains unaddressed.

Question: how do you communicate the choice?

Illustrative answer: “I would tell the report owner what changed, the expected effect on delivery and the next update point. I would acknowledge the chart request and agree a later slot rather than leaving it unanswered. If the form issue is limited, I would return to the report with the revised plan.”

Do not promise an exact recovery time before the cause is known. Give a realistic update point and revise the estimate when evidence changes.

Question: what if two tasks are equally urgent?

Make the conflict explicit and ask the appropriate owner to choose, with your recommendation and reasons. Consider splitting scope, finding another owner or delivering a smaller useful result. Do not secretly let both deadlines fail while trying to avoid the conversation.

Keep a brief record of the agreed choice. It helps others understand the plan and avoids repeated disagreement based on stale assumptions.

How do you practice this answer?

Change one condition: the report becomes due in an hour, the form has a workaround or a teammate becomes available. Explain how the priority changes. If your answer stays identical under every condition, you may be reciting a rule rather than weighing the scenario.

A good response shows a method: verify impact, compare constraints, involve the right owner, communicate the trade-off and review the plan as new evidence arrives.

References and next practice

careerservices.fas.harvard.edu — career · career.virginia.edu — star

Browse interview topics · Practise a question in Interview Challenge · How to Prepare for an Interview