Candidate:" Okay. I would like to know ..."(choose an option)
—Please choose an option—A – know since when the problem was observedB - Is it observed across all geographies or any specific geography?C - Any assumptions to be made in terms of other classifications? (ex: User’s Device types)D – All the above three insights

Please go through the RCA guide and reload this page.

Interviewer: " It was identified around a month ago..

Interviewer: " It is observed across all the geographies where this product is available "

Interviewer: " mobiles, Tabs, and laptops..no differentiation in drop based device types

Interviewer: "That's a good start. Yeah,it was identified a month ago, observed across all available geographies, & all device types
Candidate:"Got it. In that case let us begin with..."(choose an option)
—Please choose an option—A – broader perspective: External causes that could influence the CSATB – The Internal causes that could influence the CSAT

Interviewer: "Alright. Go ahead with the external causes."
Candidate:"For starters, I want to understand if there are any.."(choose an option)
—Please choose an option—A – Constraints across various geographies to setup fundraising events?B – Are there any recent events that increased the traffic flow to FB fundraisers?C – Has any unprecedented external issue caused the fundraisers application to be down for some time?D – Are there any competitors who are offering better value proposition?

Interviewer: "The CSAT is considered from those select geographies where there is an option to start an event. No constraints were noted in these areas. "

Interviewer: "Good question. Yes some natural calamities and geopolitical tensions. But no impact caused as the inflow was well accommodated. You can proceed to internal causes now."

Interviewer: "This is an internal root cause. Anyways, nothing as such happened"

Interviewer: "There are few local players but on a small scale with less traffic"

Interviewer: "Alright. Go ahead with the Internal causes."
Candidate:"Okay. On a quick note, were there are any... "(choose an option)
—Please choose an option—A - Any Changes in the User journey for both Event creator & Donor?B – complaints on low marketing or visibility campaigns due to which the possible donors are not aware of the fundraising event?C – Negative feedback/comments on the fundraisers application seen recently?D – Technical Issues with our payment partners or gateways that caused Users to leave the applicationE – Monetization attempts done (by adding paywalls or charging) to create an event or donate for the same?

Interviewer: "Well, not really. as we haven’t changed anything that impacts the user journey and all steps in the user flow remained the same "

Interviewer: "The acquisition stage in the funnel is the same as the algorithm did include fundraiser posts into the relevant user's feed & hence, no drop in visibility was observed"

Interviewer: "Great question. Yes, there were quite a few comments on user's being ambiguous to donate due to spurious fundraising events."

Interviewer: "No currently we are in a tie-up with PayPal and no issues were observed from them."

Interviewer: "Very nicely thought, but we plan to keep it un-monetized"

Candidate:"In that case I’ll proceed to the internal causes. On a quick note, were there are any... "(choose an option)
—Please choose an option—A - Any Changes in the User journey for both Event creator & Donor?B – complaints on low marketing or visibility campaigns due to which the possible donors are not aware of the fundraising event?C – Negative feedback/comments on the fundraisers application seen recently?D – Technical Issues with our payment partners or gateways that caused Users to leave the applicationE – Monetization attempts done (by adding paywalls or charging) to create an event or donate for the same?

Interviewer: "Well, not really. as we haven’t changed anything that impacts the user journey and all steps in the user flow remained the same "

Interviewer: "The acquisition stage in the funnel is the same as the algorithm did include fundraiser posts into the relevant user's feed & hence, no drop in visibility was observed"

Interviewer: "Great question. Yes, there were quite a few comments on user's being ambiguous to donate due to spurious fundraising events."

Interviewer: "No currently we are in a tie-up with PayPal and no issues were observed from them."

Interviewer: "Very nicely thought, but we plan to keep it un-monetized"

Candidate:"Okay. I get it. Based on the user comments, I would like to know more about these fake/spurious events. Can you tell me... "(choose an option)
—Please choose an option—A – Since when has the spurious event creation started and how sooner or later were they identified by the product team?B – What were the action steps or risk mitigation strategies employed to curb these events?C – Both A & BD – If any legal disputes arised due to these spurious fundraising events?

Interviewer: "identified a month ago, these events were scrutinized and were found to be created a month before the product team identified them"

Interviewer: "Yes, we did a survey with our users to assess the impact and the team is working on the solution currently"

Interviewer: "Perfect!! Both of them are important aspects to this issue. Our team came across this issue a month later. Based on this we decided to assess the magnitude of this issue by conducting an user survey "

Interviewer: "No. That’s a sure possibility but luckily nothing happened as such"

Candidate:"Okay. I get it. Based on the user comments, I would like to know more about these fake/spurious events. Can you tell me... "(choose an option)
—Please choose an option—A – Since when has the spurious event creation started and how sooner or later were they identified by the product team?B – What were the action steps or risk mitigation strategies employed to curb these events?C – Both A & BD – If any legal disputes arised due to these spurious fundraising events?

Interviewer: "identified a month ago, these events were scrutinized and were found to be created a month before the product team identified them"

Interviewer: "Yes, we did a survey with our users to assess the impact and the team is working on the solution currently"

Interviewer: "Perfect!! Both of them are important aspects to this issue. Our team came across this issue a month later. Based on this we decided to assess the magnitude of this issue by conducting an user survey "

Interviewer: "No. That’s a sure possibility but luckily nothing happened as such"

Candidate:"Okay. Now I understand the issue. Based on the information we can conclude that... "(choose an option)
—Please choose an option—A - The spurious events were the primary reason for the drop in CSATB – The spurious events may have caused a significant damage to the user’s perception that made them more wary about their donation to a credible source.C – After reviewing the other factors that are involved in the CSAT calculation, we can deduce a list of factors (including the Spurious events factor) that may have accounted for the drop in CSAT scoreD – No solid proof is observed to account anything for the drop based on the data stated

Interviewer: "Ah.. you missed something, try again"

Interviewer: "That’s true, but try thinking from an overall perspective as well"

Interviewer: "That was the answer I was looking for!! Good job."

Interviewer: "Not really, we can definitely infer something from this issue, Try again"

Candidate:"Okay. Now I understand the issue. Based on the information we can conclude that... "(choose an option)
—Please choose an option—A - The spurious events were the primary reason for the drop in CSATB – The spurious events may have caused a significant damage to the user’s perception that made them more wary about their donation to a credible source.C – After reviewing the other factors that are involved in the CSAT calculation, we can deduce a list of factors (including the Spurious events factor) that may have accounted for the drop in CSAT scoreD – No solid proof is observed to account anything for the drop based on the data stated

Interviewer: "Ah.. you missed something, try again"

Interviewer: "That’s true, but try thinking from an overall perspective as well"

Interviewer: "That was the answer I was looking for!! Good job."

Interviewer: "Not really, we can definitely infer something from this issue, Try again"