Wells Fargo Product Designer (Engineering) Case Interview: Omnichannel Fraud Dispute Experience

This case simulates Wells Fargo’s customer-first, risk-managed design process for an enterprise-scale feature. You will design a mobile-first flow (with desktop and branch handoff) that lets an existing Wells Fargo customer identify and dispute a suspicious debit card transaction, track resolution status, and seamlessly transition to assisted channels when needed. The exercise reflects Wells Fargo’s interview style: structured problem framing, strong attention to controls and compliance, and clear articulation of trade-offs, collaboration, and delivery feasibility. What the case covers: - Problem discovery and scope: Define who the customer is (e.g., everyday consumer, accessibility needs), clarify business goals (protect customers and reduce fraud loss while improving satisfaction), and enumerate constraints common to a large financial institution (controls, data privacy, service-level expectations, operational throughput). - End-to-end journey and flows: Map the customer journey from identifying a suspicious transaction to filing a dispute and tracking status; show omnichannel continuity (mobile ↔ web ↔ contact center ↔ branch) including how context and case IDs persist across channels; consider offline/edge states. - Risk, compliance, and controls: Show how you would incorporate identity verification (e.g., MFA), consent capture, disclosures, error handling, and escalation paths; acknowledge regulatory and policy guardrails typical in U.S. retail banking (e.g., Reg E considerations for electronic fund transfers, GLBA privacy) without designing legal text; propose mechanisms to prevent misuse while minimizing false positives. - Accessibility and inclusion: Demonstrate WCAG-aware decisions (contrast, focus order, dynamic type, screen reader labels, motion reduction) and inclusive language; address vulnerable customers (e.g., seniors, limited English proficiency) and offer alternatives (call-back, branch appointment). - Systems thinking and collaboration: Outline how you would partner with product, engineering, risk/compliance, fraud operations, and servicing; note handoffs (design specs, content, analytics) and how you would validate feasibility with engineering (performance, reliability, error budgets) and operations (capacity, SLAs). - Artifacts and fidelity: Create a clear problem statement, success measures, primary/alternate flows, low-fidelity wireframes, content strategy for critical states (success, pending investigation, denial/appeal), and a lightweight service blueprint linking front stage and back office. - Metrics and outcomes: Define success metrics that Wells Fargo teams commonly track (e.g., dispute initiation completion rate, time-to-first-update, assisted-channel deflection, fraud loss avoided, task success rate, CSAT/NPS, accessibility findings resolved) and how you would instrument them. Format and expectations (reflecting real WF interviews): - 60 minutes total: 5 min brief and clarifying questions; 15 min discovery and scope; 20 min flow/wireframing; 10 min risk-controls and metrics deep dive; 10 min readout and cross-functional Q&A with a panel (design lead, PM, engineering manager, and a risk or operations partner). - Evaluation rubric: Customer advocacy within a strong risk-and-controls mindset; clarity and structure; enterprise scalability and omnichannel thinking; accessibility depth; collaboration and stakeholder alignment; practicality and engineering awareness; crisp storytelling and documentation. Candidates who succeed show thoughtful trade-offs (customer effort vs. control rigor), design for continuity across channels, and propose measurable, testable iterations rather than one-shot big launches.