← All posts
general

Meta's Core Values in the Interview: Questions and Prep

Meta publishes its values, and its behavioral interviewers grade against them. That makes the behavioral round more predictable than most candidates assume: if you know the six values and have a story that shows each one in action, you know most of what the interviewer is listening for. If you walk in with generic stories about teamwork, you leave it to the interviewer to guess which value you demonstrated, and interviewers do not guess in your favor.

This post explains the values in plain terms, shows how each one turns into interview questions and signals, gives a sample answer, and lists the mistakes that cost strong candidates the round.

Meta's core values, in plain terms

Meta announced the current set of six values in early 2022, replacing the older "Move fast and break things" era list. The wording below is my paraphrase, not the official text, and the company may revise the list again; check the careers site before your loop.

  • Move Fast. Speed is a feature. Ship, learn, and adjust in days, not quarters. The value also covers removing what slows others down, so an engineer who deletes a two-week approval step is living it as much as one who ships a feature overnight.
  • Focus on Long-Term Impact. Pick work by what it changes in years, not by what is easy to demo this week. Meta pairs this with a tolerance for short-term pain in exchange for durable outcomes.
  • Build Awesome Things. Aim for products people are surprised by, not products that merely work. Quality and craft are part of the job, not a polish step.
  • Live in the Future. Use and build the tools you believe will matter next, which at Meta means working in the products and devices the company is betting on.
  • Be Direct and Respect Your Colleagues. Say the hard thing plainly, and assume the person across from you is competent and acting in good faith. Candor and respect are the same value, not two.
  • Meta, Metamates and Me. The priority order of company, team and self when they conflict. It asks you to care about outcomes outside your own scope and to help people you do not report to.

These values are not a checklist the interviewer ticks. They are the vocabulary the interviewer uses when writing feedback, so a story that maps cleanly onto one is far easier to write up as a strong signal.

How the values show up in the behavioral round

Meta's behavioral interview (historically nicknamed the "jedi" round) is a 45-minute conversation about your past work, graded on signals such as ownership, impact, conflict handling, growth, and working with others. Our Meta behavioral interview guide covers the round itself. The values are the lens on those signals: an interviewer looking for "impact" is really asking whether you focus on long-term impact, and an interviewer probing "conflict" wants evidence that you are direct and respectful at the same time.

Three practical consequences:

  1. Every story should let you name, in one sentence, which value it demonstrates and how. If you cannot, the interviewer probably cannot either.
  2. Seniority raises the scope, not the number of values. A senior engineer is expected to show the same values at the level of teams and quarters rather than tasks and weeks.
  3. The values interact. A Move Fast story with no quality in it reads as careless; a Build Awesome Things story that took two years with no checkpoints reads as slow. The best stories show the tension and how you resolved it.

Interview questions by value

Expect two or three of these per round, each followed by probes about your individual role, the numbers, and what you would do differently.

Move Fast

  • Tell me about a time you shipped something faster than the team thought possible. What did you cut, and what did you keep?
  • Describe a process or approval step you removed. What happened afterward?
  • Tell me about a time moving fast created a problem. How did you handle it?

What the interviewer listens for: speed paired with judgment about what was reversible, and a candidate who can name the cost of the speed, not just the win.

Focus on Long-Term Impact

  • Tell me about a time you chose a harder path because it would pay off later.
  • Describe a project you stopped or deprioritized because its long-term value was low.
  • How do you decide what to work on when everything looks urgent?

Listens for: a reasoning process about impact, not just a preference for big projects; evidence that you measured the outcome months later.

Build Awesome Things

  • Tell me about the product or system you are proudest of. What made it good rather than adequate?
  • Describe a time you pushed for quality when the deadline argued against it.
  • Tell me about feedback from users that changed what you built.

Listens for: a concrete definition of quality (latency, reliability, user outcome), and taste backed by evidence rather than opinion.

Live in the Future

  • Tell me about a time you adopted a tool or approach before it was proven. What happened?
  • Describe how you keep up with changes in your area, and one thing you changed as a result.
  • Tell me about a bet you made on a technology that did not pan out.

Listens for: curiosity with a track record, and honesty about failed bets.

Be Direct and Respect Your Colleagues

  • Tell me about a time you gave difficult feedback to a peer or a manager.
  • Describe a disagreement where you were wrong. How did you find out?
  • Tell me about working with someone you found difficult. What did you change on your side?

Listens for: candor delivered with respect, and the ability to describe the other person fairly. Stories where the other party is a villain score badly here.

Meta, Metamates and Me

  • Tell me about a time you helped another team at a cost to your own goals.
  • Describe a decision where what was best for the company was not best for you or your team.
  • Tell me about a time you took on unglamorous work nobody owned.

Listens for: a real cost that you accepted, and a reason for accepting it that goes beyond being asked.

A sample answer

Question: tell me about a time moving fast created a problem. How did you handle it?

Situation. I was the engineer on a growth team shipping a redesigned signup form. We had a two-week window before a marketing campaign, and the original plan assumed four.

Task. My job was to get the new form live before the campaign without breaking signups, which were the team's one metric.

Action. I cut the plan to what the campaign needed: the new layout and the two fields the campaign depended on, with everything else behind a flag. I shipped to 10 percent of traffic on day eight. Signups in that bucket dropped by about a fifth within six hours. Instead of debating, I rolled the bucket back to the old form in minutes, then pulled session recordings and found that the new field order confused people on small screens. I fixed the order, re-ran the 10 percent test the next day, and saw the bucket match the baseline. I wrote a short note to the team and the marketing lead explaining the rollback, the cause, and the new timeline, which was one day later than planned.

Result. The form launched before the campaign with no net loss in signups, and the campaign week came in above forecast. The flag-and-rollback pattern became the default for every form change on the team, and the next three launches used it without incident.

Why this answer works

  • It shows Move Fast and the judgment that makes it safe: the small bucket, the flag, the fast rollback.
  • The problem is real and the candidate owns it, which also covers Be Direct.
  • The result includes a durable change in how the team works, which is Focus on Long-Term Impact in a story that started as a speed story.

Senior and manager candidates

For senior engineers and managers the questions are the same, but the expected scope changes:

  • Move Fast becomes removing friction for other people: processes, dependencies, decision bottlenecks.
  • Long-Term Impact becomes choosing direction for a team, and saying no to work that others wanted.
  • Be Direct becomes giving feedback upward and across, including to people who outrank you.
  • Meta, Metamates and Me becomes lending people, budget, or roadmap space to another team because the company needed it more.

If every story you have is about your own tasks, the interviewer will conclude you are operating below the level. Pick the stories where your decisions changed what other people did. Our engineering manager interview guide and staff engineer interview guide cover the scope expectations in more detail.

Common mistakes

  • Naming the value instead of showing it. "This shows that I move fast" is a claim. Describe the timeline and the trade-offs and let the interviewer name it.
  • Speed without cost. Every Move Fast story has a cost. Hiding it makes the story look edited.
  • Respect without directness, or the reverse. A story where you kept quiet to stay friendly fails the value as surely as one where you were blunt and burned the relationship.
  • Only individual stories. The last value is about the company and the team. Arrive with at least one story where you gave something up.
  • Overusing "we". The interviewer will ask what you personally did. Answer in the first person from the start.
  • Memorized scripts. The round is probe-heavy; a scripted answer collapses at the first follow-up. Practice the follow-ups, not the opening.

Related guides

Want someone who has interviewed at Meta to map your stories to the values and run the probes? Get matched with a coach, then read Meta's behavioral interview and the STAR method.