Very useful product, customers legitimately get a lot of value even with high prices. Fair amount of different technology problems to interact with. Individual contributors are often helpful. Overall, this is about as good as you can imagine a mid-size enterprise software shop could be. There's a dream that it's still a fun company, but it's just a company, which isn't a bad thing.
No longer able to hear the needs of customers, who want usability and reliability. A dysfunctional waterfall process produces poorly integrated features instead. Industry best practices on scope management and quality are given lip service, but not actually followed. Technical debt is fairly high.
New projects often struggle with politics and process.
Pick some paths forward and fund them economically and politically to succeed.
I had two phone interviews with one manager and one software engineer. For some reason, both interviews felt like an initial screening: I was given a coding question to work on while they observed, and asked "Why do you want to work for Splunk?" Th
45-minute technical interview with a member on the team (LeetCode medium). 45-minute systems design question with a different team member (design Facebook Messenger). CoderPad and shared screen were used, respectively.
I first completed a coding challenge, followed by a phone screen. The phone screen involved discussing my resume and the engineer's experiences. I was then invited to an on-site interview, which consisted of four 45-minute interviews with a break f
I had two phone interviews with one manager and one software engineer. For some reason, both interviews felt like an initial screening: I was given a coding question to work on while they observed, and asked "Why do you want to work for Splunk?" Th
45-minute technical interview with a member on the team (LeetCode medium). 45-minute systems design question with a different team member (design Facebook Messenger). CoderPad and shared screen were used, respectively.
I first completed a coding challenge, followed by a phone screen. The phone screen involved discussing my resume and the engineer's experiences. I was then invited to an on-site interview, which consisted of four 45-minute interviews with a break f