The interview process involved a recruiter call, then a phone screen, and finally an onsite interview.

It seems they are looking for candidates who can develop solutions aligned with their existing thinking, rather than those who propose creative or unique approaches. I believe my onsite interview demonstrated my passion and problem-solving methodology. However, since my approach didn't precisely match theirs, I was not offered the position. Essentially, it appears one secures the job either by luck and anticipating their thought process or by having previously encountered their exact solution.

I conducted thorough research on the company and its product. I also demonstrated enthusiasm and expressed my belief in their mission, providing examples of past experiences that aligned with their core values.

Regarding the technical portion, I believe two out of four sessions did not go as well as they could have:

• In one session, the hiring manager did not allow me the opportunity to refactor or approach the code as I intended. He directed me to write what he wanted to see.
• Another session involved a design problem that was very vague, making it difficult to discern the desired outcome. While I understand this is intended to assess how one handles uncertainty and ambiguity, the interviewer began asking about a different problem while I was still attempting to solve the initial one, which added to the confusion.

Phone: 2D matrix spiral

On site:

• A BFS
• A DFS
• An OOP design problem
• A string problem

Lunch in between with 2 engineers.