TLDR: Your time is worth zero.

I received a call from a Datadog recruiter regarding my resume, which I had submitted a while ago. Initially, I was hesitant to interview because their take-home test requires a substantial 3-4 days of work.

The recruiter then mentioned that a GitHub project would suffice, but it had to meet specific criteria: be testable, well-documented, and so on.

So, I provided links to a couple of my GitHub projects. They responded a few days later, stating the projects were good enough, and we could proceed to the next interview stages.

They scheduled me for an online test with two of their developers. I reluctantly accepted, as this often indicates a toxic company culture.

I passed the test, which involved an easy algorithm question and a question about a project where I "showed my teamwork ability and collaboration." I discussed a previous job I held.

Concurrently, I asked the two developers about their roles. It turned out they were fully remote, working from different countries, and, quite interestingly, were extremely stressed.

A few days later, they informed me I had passed that test as well. The next steps were:

• ANOTHER online test
• A "system design test"
• An interview with a VP

Two consecutive online tests are a sure sign of a dysfunctional company. However, at this point, I was determined to understand what was happening, so I agreed.

They sent me a list of topics to "study" (algorithm material on LeetCode and resources from something like the "Datadog Coding School").

A week later, I was scheduled for three interviews in a single afternoon.

I passed the second online test and the system design test. Interestingly, the questions were quite basic and showed little understanding of system design from the interviewer. Then came the interview that was, in fact, amusing – the interview with the VP.

Actually, since the original VP was unavailable, I was interviewed by another VP (as if they were interchangeable).

We spoke for an hour about a past project, how I handled difficulties, and so forth. He asked detailed questions, and I felt I answered everything correctly. At no point did he indicate disagreement or that something was missing.

Simultaneously, he appeared somewhat agitated, with wide eyes and high energy.

I was curious about the remote employees. He explained, "It's a different contract; we tell them from the beginning they will be remote."

Also noteworthy, everyone in the second round of interviews was either not a remote developer or not a junior developer.

At that point, I believed everything had gone well. A few days later, I received a standard rejection letter stating that the final interview had not gone well.

Considering their regular interview process includes the take-home test, this amounted to three weeks wasted.

Based on the questions I asked during the interviews, I suspect the following is happening at Datadog:

• There's a close-knit group of long-term employees—managers, senior developers, and VPs—working onsite in Paris.
• Remote developers are located throughout Europe, being overworked and exploited.
• HR attempts to hire new individuals and break this established circle, leading to candidates being interviewed by remote employees.
• The established team requires HR to essentially re-interview candidates with "their people."
• The established team has the final say in interviews and obstructs senior candidates from joining.

I think I dodged a bullet!

Basic algorithms, system design, teamwork.