The interview process was quite lengthy; there were 7 rounds of interviews: 1) 30 min phone screen with HR 2) 30 min paired coding challenge with a SWE and an EM. The challenge was to write a method to parse a CSV file. 3) 1 hr behavioral interview with two EMs 4) 1.5 hr paired coding challenge with one SWE. The challenge was to update an existing live auction application to support silent auctions. 5) 1 hr architecture design interview with two SWEs and 1 PM. I was tasked to take an existing a GrubHub like app and add a survey during the ordering process. I had to determine what the DB tables would look like to support the survey. 6) 1 hr system design interview with 2 SWEs. This was a continuation on the architecture interview. I was asked what the system design of the GrubHub like app would look like. 7) *I didn't make it to this round but I think it would have been an culture fit interview with all the EMs Everyone I spoke to was super nice. But one thing to be aware of is that they do not present the problems to you, instead they ask you to read a README. I have dyslexia so it added some additional pressure on me and I didn't feel confident that I fully understood what was being asked of me. Had they explained the problems verbally, I think I would have done better. But overall, none of the problems presented were too difficult.

Almost perfect communication, straightforward interview with an unexpected "gotcha", but no feedback after rejection. Write your tests before writing your logic for brownie points. I didn't do this and still made it past the first round, but every little bit helps. Drill the easy/medium questions from Top Interview 150 on leetcode. Memorize the asymptotic running time of a few algorithms (binary search, sorts, etc.) and how to implement them in your language of choice, especially if good algos are in your standard library. Watch some youtube videos on good behavioral question responses. System design is more behavioral than technical. I binged relevant videos from A Life Engineered and Techlead, and aced my next interview after minor flubs with Parachute. The part of the interview I'm still very unsure about is their architectural session. You're presented with some business requirements and nothing else. This is good to test requirements elicitation capability of the applicant, but without context on what the adjudicator is actually expecting in terms of deliverable/output, you're hanging the applicant out to dry a little. In my other interviews, I was specifically asked for a system design, data model, object-oriented design, etc. These interviews often combined a few of these (e.g., system design with data modeling, or data modeling with OOD). I dove into data modeling, and consistently felt like that wasn't what they were looking for. Unfortunately, I can't confirm that because a week after the panel, I got what read like an autoreject from the recruiter. Asked for feedback, but no reply. Shame, tbh, everyone I talked to was super nice.

On “technical” interview followed by a pair programming session. While the process was outlined, the expectations felt vague. I’m not sure what exactly I missed, but that is part of interviewing. At my current position I have moved from a technical role to a management role, so my technical skills were rusty.