The process started with me submitting an application online. I then received an email from one of the recruiters and we scheduled a time to hop on a call to discuss my background and the role I was applying for. After a short call with the recruiter, she sent me a coding test that I was to work on and return by email to them. I leisurely completed it about a week later and sent it back, along with some additional feedback I had regarding some things that were not asked for but I felt were important to note. The same day as I submitted my coding test I received an email saying the next step is a technical phone interview with the team manager. We scheduled it for a few days later. On the call I was asked about my experience, as well as some fairly simple and common technical questions regarding databases and programming. It seemed to go well. The day after the technical phone interview I was asked to come in for an on-site interview. We scheduled it for about a week and a half after the phone interview. The on-site interview consisted of meeting with 3 different people. The first was the recruiter who I had been in contact with. The second was one of the engineers on the team I would be working with, and the third was the team manager (the same one I had the call with). I was also scheduled to meet with the VP, but he was out of the office at the time, so we had a follow-up call two days later. The team manager gave me a code test, in which I had to take a dollar amount and convert it into a textual representation. For example, given the amount $1,255.76, write a function that would output "One thousand two hundred fifty five dollars and seventy six cents." The question was written on a whiteboard and I was given about 30-40 minutes to write out my answer on the whiteboard. The team manager left the room and came back every so often to check up on my progress. I really liked the fact that he would leave the room, since it relieved a lot of the pressure of someone hovering over your shoulder. For about half the time I studied the question and possible solutions before really getting into the heart of the solution. I came up with what I felt was a good solution, and made sure to document any errors or missteps I had taken (as he had requested) to show my thought process. Once the time was up, he came back in and asked me to explain my solution. I went through my thought process and explained my solution, answering a couple of questions he had as I went along. The solution wasn't a complete, working set of code, but rather pseudo-code that was meant to demonstrate the solution, which he had explained was perfectly fine. The other interviewers were more of the question and answer type of interviews, comprised mostly of back and forth about my experience, how I go about solving problems, etc. It was fairly informal overall. I really enjoyed the entire process of the on-site interview, as they seemed to be succinct, with very little overlap or redundancy between interviewers.