|
I'm a frontend dev. There were a few preliminary phone screenings at first (from HR and the like) that weren't really about my duties. Then I finally got to talk to the dev manager, who asked me some basic background questions (experience, education, etc.). Altogether those didn't take more than like 20-30 min of my time combined. Then I finally got through to the coding round, and talked to the frontend dev lead for maybe like 15-20 min, and got a realistic take-home assignment (make a simple frontend in the stack we'd be using). It only took a couple hours. A few days later we reviewed it together and he gave me a chance to explain the decisions I made along the way, complimented some parts of it, critiqued other parts (but respectfully and professionally, coder-to-coder, and left room for discussion). I got the job and ended up working on his team, and it was an absolutely fantastic experience... one of my favorite frontend jobs ever, though I eventually left because of the bureaucracy above the team. ---- So what I liked: Realistic take-home, debrief and discussion. It felt like I was just working on an open-source project with dev-to-dev discussions about what worked, what didn't, and why, and given a chance to correct any issues. It was a lot like the actual code review and PR process would come to be once I got the job. It's much more representative of "will this person work well in our team, on the actual job they're going to do" instead of whiteboarding or grinding out leetcode. What I didn't like: All the bureaucracy, repeating the same basic interview questions and introductions to a bunch of people who I wouldn't end up talking to again or working with. I wish they just had an interview team with different people all in the same meeting (once), and/or pass information between them as necessary instead of making me schedule separate meetings with different people just to rehash the same few questions. |