The recruiters performed their job very poorly.

I was contacted by the Square recruiter through LinkedIn.

Initially, the recruiter asked which role I wanted to proceed with (ML Modeler or Data Scientist). I stated I was open to both but preferred Data Scientist. I then began the process and passed two technical interviews (Python coding & SQL, both quite easy). However, the recruiter then informed me I had to switch to ML Modeler, as my profile was deemed more suitable for that role (which raised questions about why we started with Data Scientist in the beginning).

Following that, I had interviews with hiring managers from both Growth and Risk (two different streams at Square). Unfortunately, the recruiter forgot to attach the Google Meet link. I ended up speaking with one of the hiring managers by phone, whereas I would have preferred a video call.

I passed those interviews and moved to the final step, the virtual onsite. I was particularly interested in the ML Modeler role within Risk, and I communicated this interest to the recruiters. However, all my interviews were scheduled with Growth managers, and the recruiters repeatedly assured me I was interviewing for both streams.

For the virtual onsite, the invitation description indicated four interviews for the first day, followed by three more interviews the next day. Unexpectedly, I had an additional interview on the first day that I had not been prepared for, and this interview proved to be the most critical.

At every stage, the recruiters were exceptionally disappointing. They failed to fulfill their primary responsibilities.

Very lengthy process:

• Recruiter initial call
• Python pair programming
• SQL programming
• Hiring managers (two interviews)
• Virtual onsite day 1 (5 interviews, 4 hours)
• Virtual onsite day 2 (3 interviews, 2 hours)

Most of the interviewers were professional and friendly; they offered assistance during the process with tips and hints. The questions were generally straightforward to solve. The hiring managers did not seem to connect with candidates. They did not view interviews as a two-sided evaluation process.

Lots of case studies. Hypothesis testing. Pair programming for fraud classification.