My resume was referred by a current employee. I received a call from a recruiter a couple of weeks later and had a 10-minute conversation with her about the entire process, my background, and what I was looking for. She then sent me an email outlining the content considered fair game for an interview. I requested a month to study before the phone interview.

The phone interview lasted 45 minutes, with approximately 35 minutes dedicated to technical questions and coding in a Google Doc. The recruiter called me later that day to inform me they wanted to proceed with on-site interviews. I asked for them to be scheduled as soon as possible, as I had already begun studying and didn't want to forget anything. The on-site interviews were scheduled for almost three weeks later.

My round of on-site interviews was not as smooth as the recruiter claimed they usually are. I was escorted to a small conference room that was designated as my "home" for the day, and the recruiter wrote the schedule of interviewers and times on the whiteboard. The first interviewer who arrived was not the one listed on the schedule. The second interviewer was 15 minutes late. The last interviewer of the day turned out to be working from home, and they had to substitute someone on the fly, causing another 15-minute delay. While not a major issue, I believe it's worth noting.

The interviews themselves were 45 minutes each, with approximately 35 to 40 minutes of that time spent on technical questions and coding on the whiteboard. All questions fell within the review content suggested by the email. One interview focused more on design and approach, and np-complete problems came up once. In general, the questions were designed to be challenging but solvable within the given timeframe.

To prepare, I read Wikipedia pages and took notes on the topics mentioned in the email. I also consulted a couple of other resources for design and integration patterns. This proved to be a sufficient review for me.

My final comment pertains to how I believe they determine the candidate's level. I had been out of undergraduate studies for four years when I interviewed, though my experience in the field is longer than that. The recruiter stated that for their purposes, my level was "four years," which I believe worked in my favor as they likely had lower expectations.

The design/approach interview was the hardest, simply because it's far more open-ended.