None I can think of, unless you enjoy high school cliques.
I worked for Capital One as a contracted "consultant" (in quotes, as my employing consulting firm, which assigned me to Capital One, has its own faults in this situation).
First, let's talk about the onboarding. It is mostly automated and very, very flaky. You need many permissions just to start work, and due to the flakiness of their AD-driven, automated system, which drops permissions requests regularly, it can take several weeks to start contributing.
The org was shifting constantly, speaking of both personnel structure/assignment and the work itself.
Comps provided by UX were seldom close to finished by the time a ticket for work was created. Business requirements for a feature were also in flux much of the time, during the work. You will be criticized when your work doesn't align, despite the fact that you completed it per the provided UX comps and business requirements.
People who "own" a domain of work will take it from you out of pure territorialism, sometimes citing complete nonsense as a justification for doing so. You will then be criticized and/or untrusted toward future work. Sometimes, they will simply block or sit on your work.
As you are either new or a contractor, you have little say in changing or moving anything, and then you'll be criticized for that as well.
Get a clue. Or, if you can't manage your own org and work, don't shoot the messenger when they're honest with you about it.
I am just receiving the proposed agenda for the interview, all in a very respectful manner and with a lot of communication between both parties, addressing any incidents that may arise, adjustments, and understandings among the interview participants
The interview process consisted of: * 2 coding rounds * 1 system design round * 1 behavioral round The interviewers were generally pretty nice and open to having in-depth conversations about the problems. They provided some hints as well as o
There were technical, behavioral, and case interviews. The technical interview was pretty simple and not too focused on algorithms. You just needed to know data structures and their usage. The behavioral interview was typical, with only three quest
I am just receiving the proposed agenda for the interview, all in a very respectful manner and with a lot of communication between both parties, addressing any incidents that may arise, adjustments, and understandings among the interview participants
The interview process consisted of: * 2 coding rounds * 1 system design round * 1 behavioral round The interviewers were generally pretty nice and open to having in-depth conversations about the problems. They provided some hints as well as o
There were technical, behavioral, and case interviews. The technical interview was pretty simple and not too focused on algorithms. You just needed to know data structures and their usage. The behavioral interview was typical, with only three quest