I am a Staff Engineer at a reputable Bay Area-based company. I went through a recruiter who had reached out to me.

I took the initial tech screen in person, which was a mistake due to the interviewer I got. The main interviewer who was supposed to be supervising the other interviewer cancelled on me, so I was left with only one interviewer. In hindsight, this was a mistake and should have been rescheduled.

I was sent a project starter that didn't compile, so I had to re-architect the starter for Brex. During the interview, the interviewer asked me to create a sample application, which I did exactly as he asked. I spoke confidently about multiple issues we face as Staff Engineers on these applications, including:

• Avoiding inline functions
• Bringing state down low
• End-to-end automation and deflaking
• Memoization
• Tuning big lists, and more.

I asked the interviewer multiple times whether he had any preferences regarding how I wrote my code (inline vs. external, memo vs. no memo, code split vs. no code split). He said he had no preference and that all he wanted to see was the sample app completed. I completed the exercise with time to spare.

When he asked me what I would do differently in production, I told him I'd memo, code split, and not inline my functions. The interviewer then asked me to send him the re-architected starter I wrote that compiles.

A few days later, I received a denial for the tech screen. When I asked for feedback, the interviewer stated that part of the reason for the denial was that I wrote inline functions and didn't code split – the exact things he told me I didn't have to worry about doing.

Among his other reasons for failing me was asking him about the shape of a custom Error object he provided. He claimed I should have known it was just a standard JavaScript Error object. However, as an experienced developer, I knew it wasn't a standard Error object at all, which is why I asked for its shape. I could have looked at the typedef, but I was trying to be collaborative and pair with him. An effort he resisted at all costs.

The cherry on top: I looked at the source code after the denial, and it wasn't a standard JavaScript Error object at all.

Afterwards, I learned that my interview had been conducted by an engineer one level junior to the position I had applied for. I assume this is how he intends to get his foot in the door internally. Sadly, what happened here was intentional sabotage by a down-level engineer and bias. I informed the recruiter about it and moved on.

At my current organization, I'm up for Principal Engineer soon, and I'm proud to say that I didn't have to sabotage anyone else to get here.

Build a toy/sample app.