It's funny, I asked myself this recently. I'm very easy going too. I can be opinionated if needed, but I also don't mind stepping back either. I just don't real

It's funny, I asked myself this recently. I'm very easy going too. I can be opinionated if needed, but I also don't mind stepping back either. I just don't really care about a lot of these things. Unless I think something is being done completely wrong, I tend to just work in whatever way the team prefers. As a rule I dislike answering open-ended and nuanced questions on the spot in interviews since it basically guarantees a poorly considered response. These days I'll push back a little on these questions by trying to get something more specific I can answer more explicitly. Eg: "That's a difficult question to answer on the spot... I'd need to think about it a bit honestly. It might help if you explain some of your values and I can give some thoughts on how I would fit with those." Something I often come back to is the context dependency of a lot of these questions. The monolith vs microservices question as an example probably doesn't have a universally correct answer. Clearly understanding what being optimised for is more important that some off the cuff general opinion on the pros and cons of monoliths vs microservices. So far as I have an opinion on that debate, this would be it. So personally I'd express an opinion by shifting the question a bit if possible. Instead of giving my values, I'd ask for company's values and explain how I'd fit. Or if I think the question is context dependent I'd probably express how important I feel the context is. I think really interviewers are just looking for someone who can contribute useful opinions / perspectives and will work well with the team. And you can do that without having to give an on the spot answer to, "monolith vs microservices?"