Coming from a small company (~20 people), I was worried about finding a larger company that had the same values: trust of individual employees, respect for each other, psychological safety, the value of diversity on teams, working in an organized way with clear roles and responsibilities, etc. I was lucky to find Asana! It's a much larger organization, but it's amazing how much they've been able to scale the things mentioned above that I find important to my day-to-day experience of being at work. And these values really do seem to go all the way up to the top leadership, rather than just being "window dressing". Asana is not a perfect place, but especially right now, it's a very, very good place to be.
For those who don't like process or tend to work in a stream-of-consciousness or intuitive way, you may find some of the structure and tooling at Asana annoying or cumbersome. I'd encourage you to lean into trying some of the things to see what you learn, and then challenging the things that are truly not useful. (Asana seems open to changing tools and processes as well!) Also, sometimes decisions can be overly considered, but it's something that leadership is aware of and working on.
Don't give in to the broader industry trends around treating employees as fully interchangeable and untrustworthy pawns! It's great that you treat your people with humanity and trust.
Recruiter call followed by a technical screen. Then onsite. Onsite was nice and there was a break for lunch too. Overall a pretty smooth process though they did kind of lag in between the screen and onsite.
Gave a simple 90-minute interview with discussion afterwards. The question was easy, and the discussion was smooth. Have a good understanding of your code and be prepared to explain all of your design decisions.
This was a discussion about some algorithm. It was an open-ended question about how I would solve the problem, essentially a proxy for remembering graph algorithms. I didn't pass, primarily because I wasn't familiar with the specific technique for f
Recruiter call followed by a technical screen. Then onsite. Onsite was nice and there was a break for lunch too. Overall a pretty smooth process though they did kind of lag in between the screen and onsite.
Gave a simple 90-minute interview with discussion afterwards. The question was easy, and the discussion was smooth. Have a good understanding of your code and be prepared to explain all of your design decisions.
This was a discussion about some algorithm. It was an open-ended question about how I would solve the problem, essentially a proxy for remembering graph algorithms. I didn't pass, primarily because I wasn't familiar with the specific technique for f