I believe it's not that there is a single right way to think about a problem, but there probably are wrong ways to think about the problem. For example, going

I believe it's not that there is a single right way to think about a problem, but there probably are wrong ways to think about the problem. For example, going through all the issues with the question and implicit underlying assumptions, talking about what you'd need to give a good answer, or the characteristics a good answer may have might not be exactly what the interviewer expected or was looking for - but such an answer could demonstrate your competence in the field and be a good answer. On the other hand, trying to make up an answer, or brazen your way through with jargon while hoping the interviewer didn't notice would likely be a bad answer. It's not that these companies are looking for a single kind of thought. On the contrary, I believe they value different kinds of thought. Instead, they believe they can sort kinds of thought into desirable and not.