I applied online.

I recently interviewed for a mid-level Data Engineer position at Pennylane and would like to share some feedback about the process. I received very little information prior to the technical interview: I was told that it would focus on system design, so I prepared accordingly. However, the interview began with a KPI definition exercise that required specific domain knowledge of a technical solution integral to Pennylane’s product. While I understand that Pennylane is a product-driven company, this format was quite unexpected. A heads-up about the nature of the exercise would have gone a long way in helping candidates prepare and showcase their strengths. I did my best to adapt on the spot, but I believe this format made it harder to fully demonstrate my capabilities. The interview was an engaging challenge, but not one most candidates would be set up to succeed in without prior context.

I’m sharing this feedback in the spirit of improvement, with a few questions in mind:

• Are we setting candidates up for success or simply testing them with curveballs?
• Is the interview format aligned with the actual responsibilities of the role?
• How can we evaluate product thinking without unintentionally filtering out engineers who weren’t informed about the full scope of the interview?

The interview began with defining a KPI, then moved on to designing a system to compute and surface that KPI within the product.