It was the difference between a wikipedia article vs. a biography (i.e., a collection of facts vs. those same facts, but arranged around a narrative).
A specific example came up while trying to explain my first company's pivots through three products (trying to figure out a social/UGC ad stack before Facebook did). If you looked at the business model, our value prop, customer segment, etc. all of that stayed the same. Which was the unifying thread, and which I can now articulate at least semi-coherently.
But when I was describing it to Andrew, it came out as three completely unrelated products, and that we were just wildly changing plans without any coherent vision or direction. I remember that moment due to his look of profound confusion, where he was really trying to figure out how these three things I had just described were related.
Comments
I would love for the author to delve more into what made the interview so bad, with specific examples.
It was the difference between a wikipedia article vs. a biography (i.e., a collection of facts vs. those same facts, but arranged around a narrative).
A specific example came up while trying to explain my first company's pivots through three products (trying to figure out a social/UGC ad stack before Facebook did). If you looked at the business model, our value prop, customer segment, etc. all of that stayed the same. Which was the unifying thread, and which I can now articulate at least semi-coherently.
But when I was describing it to Andrew, it came out as three completely unrelated products, and that we were just wildly changing plans without any coherent vision or direction. I remember that moment due to his look of profound confusion, where he was really trying to figure out how these three things I had just described were related.