Google Product Strategy: Find an Area Where Google Should Invest More and Defend It

You are interviewing for a product manager role at Google. The interviewer asks you to identify a part of the business, a market, or a product area where Google is currently putting in less than it should, and to make the case for changing that. Pick one area, justify why it is underinvested relative to the opportunity, and say what Google should do about it. ```hint Define the gap first Underinvestment is a comparison between the size of an opportunity, Google's advantage in it, and how much Google commits today. Set that yardstick before naming candidates. ``` ### Clarifying Questions - Should "underinvested" cover areas where Google already has a product it is under-resourcing, markets where it has no meaningful presence, or both? - Is the scope Google's consumer products only, or all of Alphabet, including Cloud, devices, and Other Bets? - What horizon should the recommendation target: a payoff within two or three years, or a ten-year bet? - Am I answering as a leader allocating budget across the company, or as a product leader inside one organization? ### What a Strong Answer Covers - An explicit definition of and criteria for underinvestment, applied consistently - A quick scan of several candidate areas before committing to one - Evidence from public signals for the chosen gap, plus why Google specifically has a right to win there - A concrete investment thesis: what to fund first, in what order, and how to measure progress - Honest counterarguments, including reasons the current level of investment might be deliberate ### Follow-up Questions - Which existing effort would you scale back to fund this, and why that one? - What would you expect to see after twelve months that tells you to double down or stop? - How would regulatory scrutiny of Google's market position change your plan?