I applied through a recruiter. The process took 1 day.

• The TA person called me and talked about the role on a very high level. He invited me for the F2F round of discussions.
• Problem solving Round (F2F): Supposedly the interviewer has been with Zeta for 2 and a half years (He had overall 2 and a half years of overall experience), and he was the senior most interviewer looked like. He gave a question: How to find the number of rotations given an input integer array and an output integer array. The interviewer mostly had one most optimal solution in his mind (Seeing geeksforgeeks), and wasn't okay with any other approach to this problem.

One thing the interviewer had to understand is: There are multiple solutions for a problem statement. Optimizing the problem is where you'd want your engineers to be strong at. Which I did. Second - I was asked to write executable code. I wrote Pseudo code and explained how the flow works. The interviewer was hard bent upon writing executable code. I did ask the interviewer if the EM writes code (10-15% of my responsibilities goes into coding event at my current org), and the answer was a NO. So I am not entirely sure why EMs are required to write executable code as opposed to having the right thought process. I think Zeta needs to get this straightened out.

When interviewing for Leadership roles, there is a process which companies (specially startups) follow: Tell more about the role through an exploratory conversation from a Leader (Director/VP), then ensure the panel comprises of experienced folks: Senior Engineers according with at least 6-8 years of experience, who bring maturity to the interview process. Overall, I think the interview experience at Zeta was below average, and there is loads of scope for improvement there. I hope this feedback is taken into consideration, and assessed by the Leadership team.

How to find the number of rotations given an input integer array and an output integer array.