## Interview Review: A Challenging and Frustrating Experience I recently went through a multi-stage interview process that included a CodeSignal test followed by a Power Day with four back-to-back rounds. Here’s a detailed account of my experience. ### CodeSignal Test: A Race Against Time The interview process began with a CodeSignal test, where I was required to solve four coding challenges in 70 minutes. To be honest, 17-18 minutes per challenge didn’t feel like enough time. Despite this, I managed to complete two challenges successfully. I struggled with the third, where I couldn’t clear all the test cases, and I didn’t even get to start the fourth one due to time constraints. However, I was surprised to learn that I had passed the test, even with my limited progress. ### Power Day: A Mixed Bag of Challenges The Power Day was supposed to be the highlight of the interview process, but I found it more frustrating than anything else. #### Round 1: Technical - Coding Challenge The first round was a coding challenge that wasn’t exactly a coding challenge. I was asked to code a banking app for creating accounts and transactions. This seemed simple enough, as it mainly involved designing objects or classes for users, accounts, and transactions. However, the experience was marred by constant interruptions from the interviewer. He had a particular way of coding in mind and kept pushing his ideas, even though I was doing things correctly. It felt like he had a problem with my approach, perhaps because he was a Java professional and I was using C# and .NET. His constant questioning of my syntax made it clear that he wasn’t familiar with the language I was using. This led to feedback that my communication was inadequate, which I found ironic given that the interviewer himself was not a native speaker and frequently used “Hinglish” (a mix of Hindi and English). #### Round 2: Technical - System Design The second round focused on system design, where I was asked to design a credit card application on a whiteboard. I wasn’t sure whether they were asking for a low-level or high-level design, so I asked for clarification. The interviewer didn’t provide a clear answer and seemed uncertain himself. Eventually, I understood that he wanted a high-level design. I explained the architecture, tech stack, and other relevant aspects based on my experience in developing similar applications in my previous roles. Despite this, I received feedback that I didn’t ask enough questions, which was surprising given that I had tried to clarify the scope of the task at the start. #### Round 3: Behavioral Interview The third round was a behavioral interview, which went relatively well. There were no major issues here, and the conversation was straightforward. #### Round 4: Case Study - A Misleading Exercise The final round was a case study that was anything but a traditional case study. I was asked budget-related questions, specifically focusing on the budget for testing. The first 15 minutes involved questions about different types of testing, including regression testing, unit testing, UAT (User Acceptance Testing), and system integration testing. The interviewers seemed to refer to these as “simple testing,” which was a bit confusing. The next 15 minutes involved solving a math problem related to budget calculations, such as bi-monthly and bi-weekly expenses. This was followed by a bizarre exercise where they presented me with a piece of C# code that had been poorly converted from another language. The code was riddled with errors, making it nearly impossible to dry run or even comprehend. I was then asked to diagnose why certain test cases were failing, but the test cases didn’t resemble any standard unit test cases and were incomprehensible due to the poorly written code. ### Final Thoughts: A Pathetic Waste of Time Overall, I found the interview process to be poorly structured and executed. The coding challenge was marred by a lack of time and an interviewer who was more interested in pushing his own agenda than assessing my skills. The system design interview lacked clarity, and the case study was a far cry from what a proper business case study should be. In my opinion, this process was a pathetic waste of time, and I left the experience questioning how this company manages to stay profitable with such disorganized and ineffective interviewing practices.