interview questions shared by candidates
The question ranged from development of procurement, acquisition strategy, administration methods and closeout familiarity. Additionally, personality was discussed and ascertained.1 Answer
Response was thorough. I verbally developed a sample Request for Proposal and took the Director through each of the stages through audit and closeout.
Why did you decide to go into accounting?1 Answer
I chose accounting because it is a basic tool for business so it is a good segue for numerous other paths that I could take. It's a stable choice since businesses will always seek advice from accountants. I'm good with numbers, organization, and working with spreadsheets.
Discuss how you worked with a challenging client - what was the issue, and how did you work through it?1 Answer
Provided a detailed example of a client interaction where my work was called into question, and how I managed the situation politely and gained the client's trust.
Give an example of a free resource you would refer a client to if they needed additional non biased and no cost information.1 Answer
There were not any interview questions I would consider difficult. They will ask you how much business and clients you can bring in right away, so you need to be honest here. They will also ask you if you can bring any of your friends over.1 Answer
Just tell them that you have contact in many companies, but you cannot guarantee and future business. When it comes to recruiting for them, I just told them that my close friends always watch how I do and how much I'm satisfied with the new position, before they consider jumping ship.
Estimate how many windows are in New York33 Answers
Divide and conquer. I may not know the answer to the question, but I can determine the answer because I can approximate two supportnig questions: * How many people are in New York (City or State, btw) * How many windows, on average, does each person have (home, car, work, shopping center, ....) I'll say 10M in NYC and 10 windows per person so my answer is 100M windows in NYC.
10 windows per person?!?! I want to see what apartment you're living in!!
he said 10 windows per person total (including car, home etc). 10 makes good sense. However, i do believe you'll have to go deeper than that. i.e- calculate that, add businesses, shopping centres, cabs and passing cars etc.
I would have said , "if you hire me, I'll get my team on that right away."
Not everyone in the city has a vehicle, so 10 per person can't be the basis of calculation.
Define "New York".
Should the answer include opportunities and operating systems?
There is an N, e, w, a Y....nope, no windows
Since Bain is a consulting firm, this question seems to be used as a way to probe applicant's approach to engagement problems. First ask questions to clarify the goal. Is New York the city, the state, or another municipality that happens to also be called New York, such as New York, Texas. Are we talking about windows on a building, or will it also include car windows, store shelf windows, or maybe even MS Windows licenses. After the information is clarified, it's time to analyze. Estimating the population and estimate an average number of windows per person is one approach, but it may seem too general. Another approach can be divide and conquer. Estimate the number of residential houses, estimate the number of offices, and number of vehicles, etc, and multiply by an average number for each type of structure. Round the number to the nearest million or tenth of million to make it easy to remember for the client.
I don't do windows, sorry
I gather that this very important question has some significant meaning to you, and I feel you should hire me to get to work on the answer right away. I'm going to need some support staff for this, and a travel expenses budget, and a small but dedicatd team of window counters. Gosh, see how when you ask me a question of genuine importance, I get all fired up?
Four, the answer is four.
Simple, all of them.
If you are going to estimate correctly, you need to come up with a range. A single point estimate is pretty much guaranteed to be wrong. No matter which approach you take (average building floors by average number of windows, people * number of windows, etc), at best you get a midpoint of a range. The question is how wide does the range need to be? At this point, with little information, you need a pretty wide estimate (in the million window + range).
Exactly why I was thinking of Corning as a great Private Equity deal! Let me explain...and let's take this one step further...let's start with the Eastern Seabord, and the number of windows that are really hurricane proof..now let's look at the advantages of Gorilla Glass, it's uses, and strategic opportunities...let's go bigger than New York!
as many as the glasses..
new y " O " rk. only one window.
I personally don't have the answer but I will find out and get back to you. When do you need to have a response?
do i include window's on every1's computers monitor or laptop for this?? if so then 10 windows per person at instant will be less caz the question is not clear at all,
only one microsoft windows
more than door............
1 window compulsory = no. of houses in NY
There are 271,925,321 windows. If there are more windows then it would have been made after the survey and if it is less, then it would have broken down.
Are you talking about glass pained windows? Do double pained windows count as two or only one. Should I include MS Windows? What about the number of windows the average person has open at any one time? Which version of MS Windows? Are we talking both server and desktop versions of Windows? I know the answers to all of these questions, but I need to know which ones you want included in the answer. Then (if you have some paper) write some numbers down, do some calculations and give them an answer of some big number that is based on the calculations you made. (This is a question where they are trying to see if you can think outside the box and come up with some sort of reasonable estimate. There is no right answer that can be acheived or verified.)
There are no windows for new york because it is a city not a house to provide windows
@Bill: you forget '2' the after the '4'
People 50m=dwelling x 5 windows =250million
What size is your window dimensions ? Large commercial could equal 4 residential size windows. Do you consider single pane or double glass as still one window ? What about glass block windows, do they count ? Like Carl Segan used to say, billions and billions...
You have 15 horses that run various speeds. You own a race track on which you can race the horses, and this track holds a maximum of 5 horses per race. If you have no stopwatch or other means of telling exactly how fast the horses are, how many races would you need to run between the horses to be ABSOLUTELY SURE which horses are first, second, and third fastest?23 Answers
Once this question is answered successfully, a follow-up question is posed: if you now had 16 horses, how many races will you need to run to achieve the same 1st, 2nd, 3rd ranking?
Is both answers 4?
6 runs for 15 horses and 7 runs for 16. You run 5 horses first, then in every next run you keep the top 3 winners from the previous run. Of course, since these are horses, you should always give them time to rest between the runs. You still cannot be ABSOLUTELY SURE though - a fast horse may have had a bad day.
I contend 5. Run all horses in the first 3 races (call these heats). This will limit your pool to nine candidates for the top three spots (as you can remove the slowest two from each heat). Run the second place heat finishers and two of the original first place heat finishers (just for kicks) in the fourth race. With the information from the second place heat finishers, we can determine the final 5 horses as follows: * Slowest 2nd place heat finisher from fourth race and his 3rd place heat finisher counterpart are out (as we know that that his 1st placer, the other 2nd placers and their 1st placers - 5 horses - are faster). 2 down, 2 to go. * Middle 2nd place heat finisher from fourth race and his 3rd place heat finisher are out (as we know that his 1st placer, and the fastest 2nd placer and his 1st placer - 3 horses - are faster). 2 down. So, final race is between all first place heat finishers, fastest 2nd heat horse and his 3rd place counterpart. The order this race is won determines the fastest three horses. A bit wordy but hopefully, you'll get the idea.
How about you can't be absolutely sure about the fastest horses. Otherwise you'd be rich from bettin' the ponies and not interviewing for this job.
Very good A Lars. I came up with minimum of 5 races, 6 max. Walked thru your example, and came up with 4 minimum, 5 max. Well done.
I don't think Lars is necessarily correct in all cases because you may choose the 5 fastest horses in the first race of the first heat, so horses 4 and 5, which are eliminated are faster than horses 1 and 2 in the second race of the first heat.
hjc, That's why in the last race you have the 3rd place of the fastest 2nd placer heat, to see if he's faster than the other 1st placers. I've also got 5 races but in different way than Lars. 1st race 5 horses. 2nd, 3rd and 4th race is the first two places of the previous race and 3 new horses. so after 4 races we can determine the fastests 2 horses of 14 horses. the fifth race is between the 3rd placers of the previous races and the last horse.
btw, in Lars method you can even find the 3 fastest horses out of 16 also in 5 races. in the last race you don't need the 1 placer of the 2nd fastest because you obviously know he's faster than his 2nd and 3rd placers. so that gives you an opening for the 16th horse.
OFFICIAL ANSWER: 5 races Assume that you have numbered the horses 1,2,...,15. Since each race can accommodate at most 5 horses, the first three races will be 1,2,3,4,5 then 6,7,8,9,10 and then 11,12,13,14,15. Now assume that the order the horses finish in those races is numerical (for simplicity) - i.e. in the first race 1 wins, 2 comes in second, ..., 5 comes in last. We now know that horses 1, 6, and 11 are the winners of their respective heats. So in the fourth race, we race just these three horses against one another to see who is the outright fastest. Assume (according to our previous simplification) that 1 wins, 6 comes in second, and 11 comes in third. We now are CERTAIN that 1 is the fastest horse. However, we don't yet know which horses are 2nd and 3rd fastest. But what we do know is that the only possible horses that can be the second fastest are horse 2 (immediate runner-up to horse 1 in the first race) and horse 6 (immediate runner-up to horse 1 in the fourth race.) And the only possible horses that can be third fastest then are 2 or 6 (depending which is second fastest), the immediate runners-up to these horses (horses 3 and 7), and horse 11, winner of the third race. Consequently, in the 5th and final race, we pit horses 2, 6, 3, 7, and 11 against one another. The horses finishing first and second in this race are the second and third fastest horses overall. NOTE ABOUT FOLLOW-UP QUESTION: When 16 horses are involved, we still need only 5 races to determine outright the first, second, and third fastest horses. We simply add horse #16 to the fourth race - recall that only the three heat winners raced in this race, and we therefore have room for horse 16. The rest of the race methodologies are the same. For instance, if 16 comes in last in that race, then trivially it is not 1st, 2nd, or 3rd fastest. If it comes in any place but last, then we exclude the last place horse from the final race (which would be horse 1, 6, or 11) and instead include horse 16. Hope this helps, and I am glad to see so many people taking an interest in this problem. Soon I will post another (albeit easier) interview question from the same round of interviews at Novantas.
You aren't taking into consideration that one heat could be entirely faster than the next. Yes 1 might be the fastest in its heat but maybe all 11 - 15 are faster than 1, so I don't see how you can be certain that 1 is the fastest horse after the fourth race.
whats wrong with fastest horse from each race in a fourth race with 16th horse?
View the answer on my blog at http://bit.ly/b8riKs
I also say 5, but have yet another method. ;) I start like Lars, i.e., run all horses in the first 3 races and get down to nine horses. Then I'll run the three horses that finished first and two of the horses that came in second. That way I'll know already what the fastest horse is. I'll take out the last two horses from that race because I already know that there are 3 horses that are faster. So all I need to do in the final race is take the 3 winners from the fourth race and race them against the two horses I haven't included in the fourth race.
8 races: You need 3 races with each 5 horses - you take the 3 fastest of each race You have 9 horses left. You need 2 races with 4 and 5 horses resp. You take the 3 fastes of each race You have 6 horses left. You need 2 races with each 3 horses. You take the 2 fastest of each race. You have 4 horses left. You need one final race with 4 horses. You will identify the 3 fastest. However, admittedly, they will be exhausted at the end ; ) So practically it is maybe not the best approach - but in theory it should be ok.
I wanted to type this answer as if I were thinking out loud in an interview (and before I looked at the posted answers). Anyone can work it out and give the answer here, but maybe it took them 3 hours. Here goes: 3 races gets you the 3 fastest, but clearly you don’t know their relative rank and if a 2 or 3 in one group is faster than a 1 from another. So race 4 gets you fastest 3 of that 5 group and race 5 gets you fastest 3 of that race group, then you would have 6, and race 6 gets you 3 which you add to the 1 and have a final race 7. (at this point I realize that is too simple for an interview question/answer and say) That was not so hard to figure out, so there is probably a more efficient answer, so let me rethink it. So after first 3 races, set aside the #1 horse of each. Then you have 6 second and third place horses. So if the original 3 groups were A, B, C and finishing places were A1, A2, A3, etc, then you know some of the orders and can use that to eliminate some horses without racing them. So in a 4th race you race A1, B1 and C1, and they finish in that order (for example), then you Know B1 and A1 are faster than C2 and C3 so you can toss C2, C3 out. You also know A1 is absolutely the fastest so you set him aside on the gold medal stand. Now you have B1,2,3, an C1,A2,A3 still 6 horses, which would cause 2 more races. (so at this point I ask to go to the white board to write some things down, as I am starting to do on my paper here at home). So I write down a matrix with A1,2,3, B1,2,3, and C1. On the white board, I start writing some possible outcomes and talking out loud, but it is taking longer than I would like (the key in the interview is to stay calm). I came up with one method that could do it in 5 races by racing A1, B1, C1 and two random #2 spots (in race four), then I showed that I could eliminate enough to bring in A3 and B3 in race 5 and then determine a final order. But then I saw a better solution by looking at it again. I realized after race 4 that I can eliminate B3, because if B2 is faster then C1, then B2 will be at best in third place, so there is no more spots and we never have to race B3. So now we have only 5 possible horse that can be second or third: A2,A3,B1,B2, C1. We run race 5 and the first and second place get second and third overall. The one point is, the first easy answer is usually wrong when trying to find the most efficient solution to a logic question. The other point is, keep talking it thru, use the white board or paper in the interview to “show your work” as you think out loud. Also, if you’re ever get one of these questions in an interview and you know the answer, either tell them, or fake it by thinking down some wrong paths. If you whip out the answer too fast they be suspect you knew and lied. That decision must be made by your moral compass ;-) FYI, after looking, this answer is same as InterviewCandidate. I think Lars went down the same more complicated path as I did when just "thinking out loud", but it was not as simple. Winning Horse - why would you post an answer that is so much worse then correct answers already on the board? Odd. Also, the assumption is the horses never get tired and run at the exact same speed every time. You just can time them or "judge" which is faster without a head to head race.
I did not know the followup before reading answers, but I agree with Interview Candidate - add it as 4th horse the the 4th race to see if he knocks of one of the top 3 (and therefore the #2 and #3 behind them.) In my example, if #16 knocks off B1 (therefore B2B3C1C2C3), the you just test him against A2, A3 in race 5. If it knocks off C1, then it takes the place of C1. If it knocks off A1, then it gets "gold" and C1,C2,C3 are eliminated and the A's and B's must race. B3 is logically eliminated like I said in my example.
Agree Five Races, but don't agree with the methodology. Here's how I did it Number the Horses 1-15 Run three races. Race One Includes Horses 1-5. Race Two Includes Horses 6-10. Race Three Includes Horses 11-15. For Simplicity Race One Result Order - Horse 1,2,3,4,5 Race Two Result Order - Horse 6,7,8,9,10 Race Three Result Order - Horse 11,12,13,14,15 What do we know at this point? Horses 1,6, and 11 COULD be the three fastest horses. However, horses 2,3,7,8, 12, or 13 could also still be in the top three if you take into consideration, for example, every horse in Race One was faster than every horse in Race Two. So how do we solve for this? Run a Fourth Race with Horses 1,6, and 11. Let's say, again for simplicity, the outcome of this race, in order is Horse 1,6, and 11. Now what do we know? Horses 7,8,12, or 13 CANNOT be in the top three anymore. We already know Horse 1 is the fastest, but candidates for the top three remain Horses 1,2,3,6, and 11 because it still hasn't been proven Horses 2 or 3 are slower than horses 6 or 11. Race 5 (Final Race) - Horses 1,2,3,6,11 Top three finishers are you top three horses. Comments Welcome
Best case scenario = 4 races: 1st: 1 2 3 4 5 eliminates 2 horses 2nd: 3 6 7 8 9 eliminates 4 horses 3rd: 3 10 11 12 13 eliminates 4 horses 4th: 1 2 3 14 15 Race 1, 2 & 3 eliminate 10 horses from the pool of top 3. Race 4 determines final rank. Worst case scenario = 5 races. 1st: 1 2 3 4 5 eliminates 2 horses 2nd: 6 7 3 8 9 eliminates 3 horses 3rd: 10 11 2 7 12 eliminates 3 horses 4th: 1 6 13 14 10 eliminate 2 horses 5th: 1 6 13 15 16 Final rank 16th horse is bonus
4 races... you don't need to know the fastest until the last race. You merely need to eliminate those that are not in the top 3 until the final round. Round 1: 3 races of 5 each. Take the top 3 in each (9 remain) Round 2: 2 races of 4 and 5. Take the top 3 in each (6 remain) Round 3: 2 races of 5 and 1. Take the top 3 in each (4 remain) Round 4: 1 race of 4. Line em up and see who comes in 1, 2, 3.
I see some interesting answers here - up to and including folks mistaking a 'round' for a 'race', thereby racking up a total of 8 races!. This may help to demystify the problem. You have to run 3 races to start to get the 1-2-3 ratings for the three sets of 5 horses, let’s call them A1 to A3, B1 to B3 and C1 to C3 respectively. If you race A1, A2, B1, B2 and C1 you will identify the fastest horse, and the results will dictate the next step, as follows: IF ... The results are: A1, B1 – regardless of order C1 A2, B2 – regardless of order THEN ... You are done. For example, let’s say the result is A1, B1, C1, A2 and B2. You will have established that A1 is fastest, given that it beat B1 and C1, B1 is next fastest, given that it is faster than A2 (i.e. all other A horses) and C1, and C1 is third fastest, given that it is faster than A2 and B2, and you already know that it is the fastest C horse. So anyone who thought that you needed a minimum of 5 races was wrong. IF ... The results are: The #1 of A1 and B1 C1 The #2 of A1 and B1 A2, B2 – regardless of order THEN ... You need to race the slower of A1 and B1 against C2 to see which horse is third fastest. IF ... The results are: C1 The #1 of A1, A2, B1, B2 The #2 of A1, A2, B1, B2 The #3 of A1, A2, B1, B2 The #4 of A1, A2, B1, B2 THEN ... You need to race the #1 and #2 of A1, A2, B1 and B2 against C2, C3 to see which horse is second fastest and which horse is third fastest. There is not a scenario where you need a sixth race. If you add another horse to the mix – let’s call it X – then you will need 5 races, as follows: It is still most efficient to run 3 races to start to get the 1-2-3 ratings for the three sets of 5 horses - e.g. A1 to A3, B1 to B3 and C1 to C3 respectively – and it is still most efficient to race A1, A2, B1, B2 and C1 to get your next level of information. But then things will change a bit: IF ... The results are: A1, B1 – regardless of order C1 A2, B2 – regardless of order THEN ... You will need 1 more race with A1, B1, C1 and X, to see if things change.. IF ... The results are: The #1 of A1 and B1 C1 The #2 of A1 and B1 A2, B2 – regardless of order THEN ... You need to race A1, B1, C1, C2 and X to get your true 1, 2, 3 rating. IF ... The results are: C1 The #1 of A1, A2, B1, B2 The #2 of A1, A2, B1, B2 The #3 of A1, A2, B1, B2 The #4 of A1, A2, B1, B2 THEN ... You need to race the #1 and #2 of A1, A2, B1 and B2 against C2, C3 and X to get your true 1, 2, 3 rating. email@example.com
One race. Line horses 1-5 at the starting line, line 6-10 1/3 of the way down the track, and 11-15 2/3rds of the way down. first, second and third place winners are those who break the tape at each starting line. For sixteen, just line up four horses in 1/4 increments. same one race.
The answer to 15 horses or 16 horses is: 4 races total. Just figure it out.
Is your college GPA reflective of your potential?24 Answers
No, I had to adjust to the rigor of my colllege and started an upward trend.
Hardly. A GPA is based on what you have achieved rather than on what you could achieve. I'm not saying the two are unrelated, but a GPA could also reflect the ability to work hard or to be a smooth talker. Three people might get the same GPA, while one is working hard as hell, the other is average but compensated with good social skills and talks his way out of everything and the third one is plain lazy but smart by nature. The potential of the three would be different in real life than in college.
Not in the least. It reflects your ability at that time and place to attain scores in chosen subjects.
If you had a bad GPA, say no--find examples of where you excelled or how you adjusted. If you had a great GPA, say no--its just a silly number that is hugely inflated anyway. Point out things independent of your GPA that you're proud of and think better represent you potential .
Totally agree with GBAD. Good advice
Also agree with GBAD and John. While I think this is a better question than "What was your GPA" (which interviewers shouldn't be asking for anything beyond pure entry-level jobs anyway), the fact is that your GPA depends as much on where you went and what you majored in as on how much work you did. Even then, it's not necessarily a good indicator of future professional performance, since soft skills that have nothing to do with studiousness are at least as important to your success. Definitely answer in the negative and respond by drawing attention to more relevant characteristics.
If you had a great GPA, play it up. Say it is a very common, but not always perfect, way of gauging yourself against your peers. It shows success as judged by a usually impartial instructor/professor. Then show how well balanced you are with extra-curricular activities, including successes that were not graded. Finally, you might give an example of something learned from a class, despite a subpar grade.
What do you mean GPA? In Canada we dont have that kind of score.
GPA is reflective of your desire to excel. Does not matter what the situation is, a person with a high GPA should correlate with the higher motivation and/or resourcefulness. It may not, however, reflect on your ability to succeed in a professional setting. Because the desired skillset may be different. But it clearly reflects on a person.
Me: Unfortunately no, it does not take into account my failures outside of school, you may want to look at my financial statement for that information.
Logically, no, since history indicates that some of the world's greatest achievements have been accomplished by those having flunked out or dropped out of colleges and universities.
Truly not. My GPA's is a grade point average of my teacher's understanding of my potential. My current/past earnings is the true understanding of my potential.
Orijit is very correct! GPA does correlate to the person's desire to excel. Look at Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger--they certainly have no desire to not excel!
No...my GPA was greater than zero which is more than I can say for my potential.
What does GPA stand for????
GPA stands for Grade Point Average. US high school and college courses are typically associated with a max of 4. That is, top grade is 4.0 (A+), while 1.0 is a very poor grade (D/F probably). Usually there are 2 decimal places. typical gpas - 3.85, 3.29, 2.94, 3.98 and so on. If your GPA is below 2.5 or sometimes 3.0 folks usually don't want to talk about it.
Kind of irrelevant to the initial conversation, however I can certainly remember the most from the classes I did poorly in.
Absolutely! You have no idea how much tenacity it required to maintain a 2.3 average while getting drunk and stoned on a regular basis. Just think of what I can do while sober.
Depends on the job I guess. GPA is important in some ways, or it wouldn't exist. If it said high school, I would almost definitely say no, but since it says college I think it matters a little. Most people are taking classes they want to take in college, not classes forced on them. If you can't even do well at something you like to do, how will you deal with a job that probably deals with a ton of things you don't want to do such as getting up at 6 AM? However, when you're 40 and applying for a job, your ability to take in facts and put them back out on a piece of paper when you were young probably won't be what can make or break your chance of getting the job.
I would say not exactly b'coz a GPA is a not only a refection of your potential but it comes due to a combination of luck, professors mood while checking the paper, personal situations in your life while your exam time,your team or group in your project and much more. Soo things can be both bad or good at different times leading to a good or a bad GPA. Soo i feel it is only a number making you qualify to apply for a position today but what can u make yourself tomorrow totally depends upon your determination and hard work...
No. The people with the highest GPAs in my classes were the least social. They did nothing but study. I believe more rounded or social individuals are better for any job. An elderly Biochemistry professor said, "The best pharmacists are the C students."
definitly yes...i never went to college, so my gpa is zero....i'm better than that.
School teaches you how to learn. If you know how to learn then you don't have to be confined by one profession. Also, I know of no college that teaches you how to collaborate, schmoosh with people, time manage, show initiative, get along with diverse personalities. All these things are either in your makeup or learned over time by experience in the workplace..
(If GPA is good) Yes it is. In given amount of time with available resources I made a best product and as you know the environment is challenging and one's potential in college is judged by the strong scores so I followed the parameter. (If GPA is bad) Not really. There's a huge different between actual and classroom setting. It's not necessary that the person weak in Mathematics would be weak in decision making. Natural phenomena of opportunity exploitation works in mysterious ways.
How many passengers leave JFK airport on a given day.19 Answers
Not sure: approx. 100,000?
no matter if they are flying in or out, they all leave
My answer would have been the same: "Pretty much all of them!" :)
planes leave, people board.
ALL OF EM ! (and to elaborate - The no. of ppl flying in + the no. of ppl flying out --all leave basically some on foot and other on air
All leave except for Tom Hanks, he stays stuck in "The Terminal"....... (You have to include some humor when you answer :)
how is this a brain teaser?
This question tests how you think critically. In this example, you could start with estimating that JFK has about 100 gates, and that a plane leaves from a gate every 3 hours, totaling 800 flights per day. Guessing that the average plane holds 200 passengers, you arrive at 160,000 per day departing. The interviewer is not as interested that you get the right, or even close, answer, but rather the thought process you go through to figure it out. For those that are interested, the real number is about 131,000 per day based on statistics from 2007.
the question was "How many passengers leave JFK airport on a given day.?" my answer is the (number of people arrives that day )+( the employees work there (except for the security guards)) after all no-one stays on the airport forever
The answer is the thought process, as above. Personally, I'd have started with the number of flights: flight frequency per runway * runways * open hours. Assume half are leaving, then guess the number of passengers per plane. I might also point out that the number of assumptions multiplied together in that calc is such that you're unlikely to be within an order of magnitude of the right answer...
Tim Besse stole my answer! And I thought I was the only one who thought of that. Seriously though, if I was asked this question in an interview I would answer "probably about half" figuring that half the flights are departing and half are arrivals, similar to what another poster stated. Depending on the position you are interviewing for they may be impressed by you going through a long critical calculation, I don't know. In my line of work, character is more important that pure intelligence.
all of them
100% 1. Those passengers that arrive on an airplane either leave by another plane or leave the airport by other means. 2. Those passengers that arrive by other means take a plane and leave or they are not passengers. 3. That is, if you exclude those that are still there at midnight. You can assume this number is constant from night to night.
Well, there are passengers in cars that come and go, those onboard planes that do the same and some perhaps catching a lift on a bicycle or maybe even piggyback. If there are those that try to actually ride on JFK, he's dead, so - good luck.
I would have to agree with those that say all of them. However I must point out an addition to the facts. We are all assuming something when answering these types of problems and as such the answers are as much subjective as they maybe factual. To the rest here, READ the question. Passengers are ON the planes if not then they are NOT passengers! ALL passengers leave eventually however what is a 'day' not specified as 24hrs- because a 24hr period COULD span 2 'days'. ALSO it is possible that a plane could be held hostage on the tarmac for more than 24hrs - these passengers would not leave on the same 'day' so our total may be slightly less than 100% on any given day. Ultimately though, I agree that it is the interviewer's 'hidden' question that counts. With these types of questions the answers are not so mathematically obvious. But rather, the questioner is looking deeper into your logic, character, personality etc. Are you a thinker, do you think out-side the box, do you get frustrated, are you a smart-ass, etc. That's been my experience
not all them. because som arrive at one day and leave the next day. My answer will be "A LOT!"
the answer does not require a number but how will you find out. It depends on the day of the year and also on how many people are actually on the plane and if all of them are going to JFK or are catching connecting flights.