Loved my team and the work we did at a high level. Everyone was very easy to work with. Room for growth meant promotions were feasible and achievable. The company is in a great place, and my team will surely do good things.
The work gradually became less interesting and challenging. My team used to be somewhat removed from the larger engineering org's bureaucracy, but that sadly crept in. The push on performance meant breaking clear separation of concerns between my team's work and what should be others' concerns.
It isn't strictly a "con," but I didn't really enjoy the proprietary front-end technology that much. The bottleneck of a central technology team owning the build pipeline meant if they broke something, everyone broke. I would have preferred if they offered plugins and guidelines.
The constricting tech stack means you're growing in a world that is detached from the rest of the industry. The last con is the pay structure is a mess. HR and finance departments hold pay behind locked bars, and if you want to move to somewhere as a remote employee, expect a sizable deduction in pay.
You all do incredible work; however, the frequent restructuring in the last year has been jarring and difficult to navigate.
Two 90-minute technical interviews were conducted. The first interview was disorganized and not very time-efficient. The second interview was well-organized, but the questions were very easy and basic. Only one of the three people on the interview
1. Recruiter screening 2. Two team managers: 45-minute interview, not too technical 3. Two peers: Technical interview, about 90 minutes 4. Panel interview: About 5 people, roughly 2 hours 5. One-on-one technical interview with a high-level archit
The first stage was over Zoom with some code-sharing environment. All the questions and tasks were pretty straightforward and relevant. Then there was an in-person, three-round office meeting with variable seniority panels, using whiteboards and la
Two 90-minute technical interviews were conducted. The first interview was disorganized and not very time-efficient. The second interview was well-organized, but the questions were very easy and basic. Only one of the three people on the interview
1. Recruiter screening 2. Two team managers: 45-minute interview, not too technical 3. Two peers: Technical interview, about 90 minutes 4. Panel interview: About 5 people, roughly 2 hours 5. One-on-one technical interview with a high-level archit
The first stage was over Zoom with some code-sharing environment. All the questions and tasks were pretty straightforward and relevant. Then there was an in-person, three-round office meeting with variable seniority panels, using whiteboards and la