Leadership - very mature, honest, and direct.
Compensation - top-tier salary + stock, amazing benefits, A+ food, etc.
Work/life balance - 1 enrichment day/month, lots of forced (entire company on vacation) time off, 9-5 workdays for most.
Culture - everyone I met is very supportive and helpful. Pro growth and change (changing jobs, careers, etc.).
Mission - great to know that you are improving economic opportunity for the global workforce.
They put their money where their mouth is on diversity, inclusion, and belonging. LinkedIn supports and runs many programs to improve DIB at LinkedIn and around the world.
Very bureaucratic. Lots of meetings and cross-team coordination are required for everything.
Old tech stack, at least 10 years behind 'modern'.
Lots of manual work in the engineering domain that should be fully automated by now. To get a new service up & running, it takes more than a few meetings with platform teams, tickets, escalations, manual configurations, etc.
Middling technical foundations and excellence. While there were exceptions in various teams, overall the technical bar did seem lower. Looking at other companies of LinkedIn's size and age, they are publishing docs, books, papers, blog posts, etc., about their tech stacks and processes. LinkedIn doesn't do that because they don't innovate like other companies.
Keep up the awesome work on culture and mission! Talk to some modern companies at LI's size/age to see how they structure their engineering orgs and processes to compare.
Fund internal tooling teams more and give them carte blanche to do what they think is right, even if it steps on some toes.
The recruiter contacted me. There were two rounds of phone calls with very interesting people. The second round focused heavily on machine learning, with a large number of fast questions. Overall, I was satisfied with the phone calls. The on-site in
Recruiter called. They were very professional. Phone screen: 2 questions. Onsite: 6 rounds. * 2 technical coding rounds (one basic question about merging intervals, the other about trees) * 1 design interview * 1 craftsmanship interview *
It was a very standard interview. I aced the interview questions, as the interviewers ran out of them. Ultimately, I didn't get an offer because the projects I mentioned to one of the interviewers were too old, according to the recruiter. You coul
The recruiter contacted me. There were two rounds of phone calls with very interesting people. The second round focused heavily on machine learning, with a large number of fast questions. Overall, I was satisfied with the phone calls. The on-site in
Recruiter called. They were very professional. Phone screen: 2 questions. Onsite: 6 rounds. * 2 technical coding rounds (one basic question about merging intervals, the other about trees) * 1 design interview * 1 craftsmanship interview *
It was a very standard interview. I aced the interview questions, as the interviewers ran out of them. Ultimately, I didn't get an offer because the projects I mentioned to one of the interviewers were too old, according to the recruiter. You coul