Checkout has some amazing technology. The vast majority of it is cutting-edge, and there's a general enthusiasm towards perpetual improvement.
Most of the people who work at Checkout are smart, motivated, and just all-around nice. There are frequent formal knowledge-sharing sessions, and the environment is dynamic with regards to the number of interesting projects being developed.
There is general freedom to suggest and motivate for the implementation of projects that you feel may improve the business operations, as well as a fair amount of autonomy in the way that you work and implement features.
The company is going places. They just received the largest amount of Series-A funding for a European FinTech on record.
There is zero transparency on career progression in the engineering department. Nobody seems to be able to shed any light on what characteristics and competencies are required to be able to move to a position of more seniority. Vague goals and wishy-washy promises are often offered to appease, and are promptly forgotten come the next review period.
This problem is further exacerbated by incompetent managers, as they are often the only line of communication between you and one who makes decisions on your career progression. I found myself often misrepresented in this fashion. This is not always the fault of the manager, as Checkout does not provide training for any of its engineering line managers, and I don't think that it's malicious. Seniority and technical know-how do not equal people management and development skills.
There is no recourse for someone in such a position. Reviews are downward-facing only. One never has the opportunity to review one's manager, and so many issues either never come to light, or are ignored when brought up face to face, eventually resulting in a decision to move on to better things.
Please train your managers. Seniority and technical know-how do not equate to people development and management skills.
Offer managerial reviews so that employees have some recourse should they ever feel stuck.
The interview process involved several steps: * The first step was a Recruiter Interview to describe checkout. * The second step was a non-technical interview to introduce myself. * The third step was a challenge to evaluate my technical skill
HR interview. Interview with senior manager/tech lead about technologies, work, and technical information. No tests or hard questions. A final take-home assignment (to do a test). Final interview again with HR, as with most companies.
The introductory HR screen, where they discussed the company, seemed fine. However, the HR representative didn't appear very confident in judging what a software engineer actually is. They asked whether a developer can do what a software engineer doe
The interview process involved several steps: * The first step was a Recruiter Interview to describe checkout. * The second step was a non-technical interview to introduce myself. * The third step was a challenge to evaluate my technical skill
HR interview. Interview with senior manager/tech lead about technologies, work, and technical information. No tests or hard questions. A final take-home assignment (to do a test). Final interview again with HR, as with most companies.
The introductory HR screen, where they discussed the company, seemed fine. However, the HR representative didn't appear very confident in judging what a software engineer actually is. They asked whether a developer can do what a software engineer doe