If you had a consumer survey that would tell you the likelihood of a bridge being built across two properties (and you know what the net profit/loss for each property was based on the bridge being built and not)... could you come up with a value which you would want to see in the survey in order to purchase a particular property?

The first case was a site-selection problem: you had to choose between two potential locations without knowing which one was correct, and the solution required some probability calculations—especially being careful with decimals. The second case was about choosing a painting from a sequence of 100, where you can’t go back once you pass on a painting. The goal is to pick the most valuable one. I actually thought this was a great case—it really tests your understanding of statistics, probability, and even elements of game theory. However, my interviewer felt very controlling and seemed to want the answer delivered in one very specific way, which I didn’t particularly enjoy. He also went 20 minutes over on that single case (in a one-hour session), even though I had another behavioral interview immediately afterward. At times he went down his own rabbit hole trying to solve the problem alongside me, instead of evaluating my logic, communication, and analytical thinking—the whole point of the interview. It came off a bit unprofessional. The behavioral portion was fine, though it felt like he was just running through a checklist of required questions.