Two additional onsite interviews after HC
I was asked to appear for two more interviews by the HC to collect some additional data points regarding OO programming, data structures, algos, general CS concepts, general coding, web development. 1. This is pretty much everything what they would have evaluated in my previous rounds. I m wondering what they missed the previous time? 2. Would these be tougher than the previous onsite? 3. Would the HC have indicated the interview panel about what is to be evaluated this time?
Hahaha. Lol. They had 5 rounds to interview and they still couldn't figure all this out about a candidate?
Based on Google’s own research (read book by Lazlo the ex head of HR on this), hiring should involve no more than 4-5 interviews as more yields very little additional info. In reality though, Google’s own recruiting process circumvents this guideline by using ‘informal’ interviews to add to the list of interviews, but of course all interviews matter The whole process is a joke really. I have folks reporting to me that really shouldn’t be hired (low skill, entitled) that I inherited that all passed this supposedly rigorous hiring process. The quality of folks at google is no better than at other companies I worked at. There’s just more luck involve in terms of who gets through hiring. Instead of wasting everyone’s time on excessively long and tedious hiring process, make perf management count and actually get rid of people that are low performers instead of believing that there couldn’t have been a mistake in hiring and that we must give them once chance after anther to switch jobs within google.
Can you guys actually post this anonymously inside Google? When someone from outside Google says this, they just ignore it with the usual excuse of "We have a very high bar" or "minimizing false positives". They never consider the failure modes in their process, over reliance on assessments by mediocre interviewers (let's be honest, not every interviewer is good) and the hiring committee making a blind decision in 5 minutes for something that took at least 7 hours of interviewing. How does this make any sense at all? I get that over the course of time the process keeps tuning itself but then they lost on A LOT of candidates by then. The only candidates who can even get in are through pure luck anymore. How is this better than random sampling of a set of software engineers? The committee really isn't doing its job well. They should be penalized for making everyone inside Google and outside who want to work there go through this misery. Extra on sites? Sheesh
How did it go with additional rounds?
I got an additional interview after on site. They focus on systems design with a very specific system. The interview lasted for 1 hours and 15 minutes. I thought that I did well but ended up being rejected. Why do they need an additional intensive systems design (I already had a systems design interview in my first on site) that long to for an L5? Why did it need to be that long because if I did bad, then why did they just finished it within 45 minutes? I am not from an internet company so perhaps they don't like me from beginning. They should have rejected me right away. Next time I will never do additional interviews again. The whole process lasted for almost 4 months. What a joke.
Can you share more about the interview? What was the question? If you don’t mind asking.
Fuck that noise. Googles hiring process is broken af. I agree with your #1. But if you’re at yahoo I guess you need to stick it out so you can gtfo.