Do you generally recommend that candidates go 'above and beyond' in preparing for interviews by, for example, putting together 30-60-90 day plans or a report on the company/product and strengths/weaknesses/opportunities to give the interviewer a glimpse into how they think? In which situations do you recommend this approach or not?

I don't have a recommendation for or against this type of detailed preparation, especially if it helps you structure verbal responses that also give a glimpse into how you think, problem solve and can be an asset to the company.

But I wouldn't focus on developing unrequested collateral at the expense of having solid verbal responses.

I would bring out supporting materials when they support your response to a particular question (ie if asked about what your 30-60-90 day plan would be in the role or what your organizational process is, show the prepared collateral as part of your response). Just be prepared for technical difficulties (internet bandwidth issues, screen sharing issues etc) that may impact how/if you can share these items in the interview itself.

And remember, if what you prepared highlights a particular strength that you bring to the role, then you could also include it in a "thank you" email as a follow-up to your conversation.

I prefer to keep questions such as 30-60-90-day plan and SWOT analysis for internal applicants only. In my experience, external candidates lack depth in this type of question, and they will always be in disadvantage against internal candidates who have the benefit of being insiders.

For internal candidates, this type of approach can be helpful to learn a few things about them:

• Have they done proper research and due diligence on the role? What is their real level of interest?

• Do they understand some of the main challenges and opportunities the role offer?

• What is their level of business acumen? Do they have a grasp on Product Strategy and Competitive Environment?

• Do they understand what it means to be successful in the role?

I’ve been in all four quadrants - I've gone “above and beyond” and both landed the job and been rejected, and I’ve also "played it safe" with mixed results. Each outcome taught me something. The key litmus test to me is understanding seniority and structure - done right, it’s a differentiator; done wrong, it can backfire.

Seniority: The more senior the role, the more this is important - even expected. Deep research helps you speak the company’s language more fluently, anticipate challenges and bring novel ideas. If your interviewer doesn’t bite when you mention your prep, attach it to your thank-you note as a subtle differentiator.

Structure: In highly structured or mature organizations, unsolicited deep dives can signal misalignment between your expectations and that of the hiring team. Worst case, it can be read as a tendency to “boil the ocean”. Use your recruiter or TA contact to gauge if this approach will be well-received.