Decent pay, benefits, and easily accessible locations.
Simply put, stack-ranking fosters mediocrity, popularity contests, and racial nepotism. This can lead to teams wholly composed of people from the same country of origin.
There is little point sharing advice and feedback to management. They feel safe (and for good reason), so they have no reason to change.
Amazon's cultural problems are intractable and ineluctable. It will take dramatic executive action to change Amazon's culture, which is far too risky to merit doing so.
To quote my last manager: "Not everyone needs to be good at their jobs. Some people are bad at their jobs, and that is okay."
To quote them again: "If you want to get promoted, then people must like you. That's how it works here."
Joining Amazon, I thought that I would work with smart, passionate, and committed people. Perfection should not be the enemy of the good, but I saw countless engineers deploy code which was far below what any engineer worth his salt would characterize as good. I heard no one express concern, except when things broke. Even then, nothing changed because the most important thing at Amazon is obsequiousness to those above you.
If all you care about is a paycheck, then work at Amazon. If you are a model minority with a modicum of talent, then you are basically guaranteed a job. If you know how to play politics, then you will get far. But if you actually care about building things which work well, then go elsewhere. And if you hold yourself to a high standard, then you will grow disillusioned and dispirited. You will feel like a character from the television series The Wire: surrounded by intractable decadence and corruption which will ruin anyone who tries to change it.
The interview consisted of two back-to-back 45-minute rounds. The first round focused on SQL-based questions, statistics, and LeetCode problems. The second 45-minute round covered behavioral and data modeling questions. For the behavioral question
It was good, but after the ninth round, they rejected. They should have given one more chance to people who reached the ninth round, as they have some ability as well. So, they should also be considered.
Good interview with some pro-level questions into data and Python. Checked the decision-making skills and mathematical skills of the candidate, communication skills also analyzed, and thereafter few logical questions.
The interview consisted of two back-to-back 45-minute rounds. The first round focused on SQL-based questions, statistics, and LeetCode problems. The second 45-minute round covered behavioral and data modeling questions. For the behavioral question
It was good, but after the ninth round, they rejected. They should have given one more chance to people who reached the ninth round, as they have some ability as well. So, they should also be considered.
Good interview with some pro-level questions into data and Python. Checked the decision-making skills and mathematical skills of the candidate, communication skills also analyzed, and thereafter few logical questions.