Several steps, including technical (coding), a problem solving session (possibly the hardest), and a systems design session. It can be tough, as I’d say it’s not a traditional style of interviewing, but it helps gauge whether the company is right for you technically speaking - and gives some insight into how your interviewers think. There’s a large focus on cultural fit, so it’s important for candidates to get on well with everyone.

While the interviewer seemed nice, it's unclear how prepared the interviewer was 🤔 Many questions kind of repeated themselves, or were weird hypotheticals. Interviewer seemed nice but questions were a bit disorganised & felt like it was a checklist without much thought. As some questions also asked stuff about things I just explained to the interviewer. I got asked a weird question like "would I reject an offer if paid twice but had a bad culture?". Not sure what is sought after with this question, but if it’s to evaluate if I care about culture, there has be a better way to ask that... it’s also very superficial. Would have thought questions that assessed behaviour would be better for assessing culture add 🤔 It also comes off, as trying to weeding out people who know their own worth. In the end there were limited slots to fill and they just got a better vibe from other candidates. That's a perfectly reasonable reason to not proceed with someone, I’m sure there are bigger fish in the pond and budgets are tighter. I get it. Unfortunately they followed that with vague unhelpful feedback like "you’re too junior” (didn’t elaborate why), “come back, when you’re more senior" (no thanks), and something about having already filled more junior roles (I didn’t ask nor had any intention too?). This isn't really helpful feedback 1️⃣ What we’re they expecting me to do anything with this? 2️⃣ Provide examples so feedback feels earnt. If it’s the case that other candidates performed better or provided more certainty that’s all you need to say.