The first round is a coding screen with a LeetCode-like problem. The problem itself isn't particularly difficult from an algorithmic standpoint, but there are a lot of details and edge cases to consider for the time available.

The solo interviewer looked like a nice enough person but seemed disinterested in being an active participant in the interview, mostly sitting back and observing while I was explaining my thought process and coding. At the end of the interview, the interviewer mentioned they had jet lag since they had returned from a trip overseas the day before.

The interview process overall felt like a waste of time, and it seemed as if the main thing Headway screens for is how well a candidate can solve a problem by themselves under pressure. There was very little participation on the part of the interviewer and no attempt to engage with the candidate in the problem-solving process.

The absurdity lies in the fact that if you were to get hired at Headway, you'd most likely just be building CRUD stuff. This isn't FAANG we're talking about here. This was confirmed by the interviewer when I asked what they like about Headway. The answer was that (paraphrasing here) it was primarily the people and that, technology-wise, they don't do anything particularly compelling.

Given a calendar with a list of appointments and their durations, find the closest and most narrow available slot.