This was an especially interesting experience with LinkedIn. This being the second time I have interviewed with the company, the first time also the experience wasn't worth mentioning.

I applied for a senior-level job and was contacted by a recruiter. She mentioned that those positions were not open but a Test Engineer position was available.

I told her I wasn't interested in an entry-level position that was only for testing. She assured me it was an automation development role. For one, the ambiguity in the title strikes me as off-putting. However, I appreciate the fact that they send a lot of preparatory material links to get you on board for the interview. That's a good move.

Then she scheduled the interview. On the appointed hour, two members of the team contacted me.

From the tone of the interviewers, I could tell LinkedIn apparently does not provide training to its interviewers. He asked questions as though he already knew it was a waste of his time and I was not going to be able to perform well.

Throughout the interview, he kept interrupting my thought process. I have interviewed with other companies where the interviewer knows when to be quiet and hold back. This guy seemed a little too anxious.

I admit I had some trouble answering his questions. I made some mistakes, but I corrected them as well. In the end, I could say I did answer correctly, although with some prodding.

Usually, when you read online about interviewers assessing you, you are often told the correct answer doesn't matter and your thought process does. However, I can already sense they are going to reject me, meaning the thought process really did not matter in this case.

LinkedIn is a great company, but I hope they provide some sort of training to interviewers about how to conduct coding interviews and the psychology behind being in the hot seat.

singleton, binary trees