Process
I thought this was one of the best and most innovative interview processes that I’ve seen for a software engineer position.
The process was as follows:
- An HR interview
- A "hiring manager" interview (though mine was just with a senior engineer)
- A pair programming challenge
- The final round panel
The first two interviews asked standard questions that you should already be anticipating.
The pair programming round is unique and, I believe, does a much better job at showcasing industry software engineering than LeetCode would. For this interview, you're given code and need to figure out what's going on and make changes as you see fit, given a new business requirement.
The final round panel for me consisted of two technical interviews, then two with managers. Mine were spread out over two days.
The first technical interview was similar to the pair programming one, where you get some starter code but then need to implement all the business requirements. You’ll need to figure out how the provided libraries (likely unknown to you) work and operate (googling is allowed), and then satisfy all the business requirements. This uses real-world scenarios that many/most full-stack engineers encounter on the job.
The second technical interview was more LeetCode-style, but was still a Klaviyo-made question (I think). I’d probably classify it as a medium LeetCode, but on the easier side of mediums. I'm not the greatest at LeetCode, but I finished it in about 25-30 minutes.
The interviewers for all the technical interviews were there to help. They were super nice and answered technical questions I had mid-interview.
The last two interviews were with the actual hiring manager of the team and then that manager’s director. These included typical questions you’d expect from both.
Throughout the whole process, HR was amazing. They were incredibly prompt with the interviews, both with scheduling and providing results. They also gave plenty of prep material, so you have a solid understanding of what to expect from each individual interview.
In my opinion, this interview process should be the gold standard for software engineer interviews going forward.
Questions
Cannot disclose due to NDA.
Was this helpful?
Interview Statistics
The following metrics were computed from 4 interview experiences for the Klaviyo Software Engineer II role in United States.
Success Rate
Klaviyo's interview process for their Software Engineer II roles in the United States is very selective, failing most engineers who go through it.
Experience Rating
Candidates reported having mixed feelings for Klaviyo's Software Engineer II interview process in United States.
Klaviyo Work Experiences
- 2.0Smart colleagues and nice office, but poor managementSoftware Engineer II • Current EmployeeBoston, MAAugust 10, 2026Pros: - Decent benefits - Nice office space - Lots of smart peopleCons: - Management is nonexistent, and you can expect to perform tasks two pay grades above your level. - Crippling tech debt, which is exacerbated by vibe coding. Nobody cares about code quality. Documentation is written by AI. Projects and tickets are generated by AI. Code is written by AI. Then PRs are opened by AI. Humans can’t read most of it, so AI is used to summarize what is even going on. Then you wake up at 3am because a page alert fired off and you have no idea what caused it. - Nonexistent work-life balance, where teammates frequently boast about building on the weekend. - No business model outside of AI.
- 5.0Great place to workSoftware Engineer II • Current EmployeeBoston, MAOctober 14, 2022Pros: Everyone whom I have met has been super friendly and always willing to help me, good benefits, a good balance of meetings and work time, very transparent in the work that is happening throughout the company, and hybrid so I can choose when and if I want to go in the office.Cons: Not a lot of people come into the office, so it can feel empty since people are spread out between 4 floors.
- 1.0Concerned by CPO's dislike of the term "work-life" balanceSoftware Engineer II • Current EmployeeBoston, MAJanuary 30, 2025Pros: The individual contributors (ICs) here are incredibly talented, making it a great place to learn and grow. Managers are generally supportive and do their best to shield teams from the constant changes happening at the leadership level.Cons: - Communication around major changes—like return-to-office (RTO) policies and benefits—has been poorly timed and lacks transparency, often causing unnecessary frustration. - Morale has been noticeably declining, with burnout becoming more prevalent. - The hotel-desk system remains ineffective, as booked desks are frequently treated as communal space. - Meeting room availability is increasingly limited due to the in-person hiring push, making it difficult to collaborate. - Senior leadership is resistant to employee feedback, particularly when it comes to RTO policies and product direction. - Perhaps most concerning, the Chief People Officer has openly stated that she does not believe in work-life balance and is pushing efforts to integrate work into employees’ lives rather than respecting personal time. This approach is out of touch and is contributing to burnout.
