I took some time before I posted this review, as I wanted to reflect on the interviews and if I will interview for Stripe again. (I will not in the near future).

The interview format was mostly behavioral and situation-based, with a lot of emphasis on execution, setting strategy, self-awareness, and technical depth. The end-to-end process took about 6 weeks, with 7 rounds of interviews for an engineering manager role.

Throughout the interview process, the recruiting and scheduling support from Stripe was great and worked like a well-oiled machine. The interviewers seemed like great technologists, passionate about Stripe and its vision.

Overall, it seemed like a place with a good team of technologists and lots of interesting problems to solve, but struggling with prioritization and scaling problems. Nothing new for a company at this stage.

Although I like that Stripe has attempted to convert its culture fit rounds to a "formula" with the format they have, I found the overall process very dry and vague.

In the 7 rounds, I only spoke to the hiring manager for 45 minutes, out of which 40 minutes were spent on more formulaic situation-based questions. I had 5 minutes to ask about the role, the vision, and his leadership style.

Throughout the process, I repeatedly requested the recruiters that I would like to get more clarity on the role so that I could cater my answers to the interviews, and second, to know why I should spend many, many hours preparing for interviews that involve written sample submissions, technical presentations, etc.

Despite my feedback, no one took the time to link me to the hiring manager. This baffles me.

When I hire for leadership roles, I want to ensure if the candidate feels comfortable with all the responsibilities of the role, what they will be accountable for, and that I and he/she has some level of trust established. You don't tend to hire/fire these roles often, so this level of time spent is key.

In the 45 minutes with the hiring manager, he probably made eye contact with me twice. Honestly, to this day, I do not know what the role entailed, what problems he needs solved, the size of the organization, or anything about his leadership style. All other interviewers were randomly picked from Stripe who had no idea about the role and just concentrated on getting "data" during the interview.

I felt like a research subject and, honestly, towards the end of the process, I lost interest in the interview process. The written sample exercise is great, but again, what is the outcome that Stripe is trying to obtain? Every leader is able to write and convey the message to their audience in the right context. I honestly had no idea who that audience and context was. The recruiting team tried to help, but they did not know about the role either and only gave very vague definitions. The technical presentation was also very vague. I was paired with a manager and an engineer. Without context, I went in with a big picture context and then drove into details. I found the panel to be really lacking in curiosity and interest. Perhaps it was my communication style which deterred them from asking any relevant questions, or perhaps they do not solve engineering problems at scale. The thing is, I have no idea, as the process was dry and had no context for me.

After the interview, and not receiving the offer, I contemplated if I should apply again to a different role. There are other very interesting roles at Stripe. I ultimately decided not to, because honestly, I cannot answer "what's in it for me?"

I will revisit Stripe in a few years, and I hope they take this feedback to make the interview process about attracting talent from diverse domains and perspectives, not from a point of view of trying to fit leaders to a formula. In the long run, they will create a homogenous culture, which will deteriorate innovation and growth.

How do you set vision?

How do you execute?