did a PM loop at figma two weeks ago. four rounds: product sense, analytical, leadership, and a cross-functional round with a designer and an eng lead.
most of it was what you'd expect. the one that caught me off guard was in the product sense round:
"Figma is being used by a team in a way the product was never designed for. Walk me through how you'd decide whether to support that use case officially."
they didn't give me a specific example. i had to construct one. i ended up talking about teams using figma for project management (which is real, some teams do this with frames and connectors), but i kept second-guessing myself mid-answer because i wasn't sure if that was too obvious an example or if i was supposed to know something more insider.
i think the answer they want is something like: look at frequency and stickiness of the workaround usage, interview the teams doing it, understand if it's core to their workflow or a band-aid, see if there's a better solution in-market they'd switch to, and then decide if you support it natively vs. enable it through the API vs. ignore it.
but the real trick is they want you to argue for NOT doing it as a real option. a lot of PM candidates treat everything as "yes we should build this" and that's a tell.
didn't make it to offer. got cut after the cross-functional round. no feedback on that one yet.