Tell me about your biggest failure.

"Overall: The interview was well structured and closely matched the role. It covered SQL and BigQuery performance, dbt pipelines, data modelling, Airflow, data quality, Python, debugging, cost, and cloud platforms. The scenarios were realistic for an attribution-pipeline migration, which made it a good test of practical skills rather than theory. What went well: The questions were scenario-based and relevant: late-arriving attribution data, restated ad-network spend, backfills, and duplicate investigation. The interviewer followed up on my answers and rephrased or repeated questions when I asked, so I could go deeper. The pause option and the freedom to take time to think were helpful. I felt strongest on dbt pipeline design, data quality testing and investigation, and data modelling for marketing data. What didn’t go well: In the data quality section, the screen kept showing questions from earlier sections while new ones were asked by voice, and the check-in question was repeated several times. This broke my concentration for a while. The suggestion to turn away from the screen was confusing, because the questions were displayed on that same screen. The session ran about 10 minutes over the scheduled time. On my side, a few BigQuery-specific questions, such as partition pruning behaviour and query plan metrics, deserved sharper answers. I’ve since reviewed those topics. There was no opportunity to ask about the team or the project, which I’d normally do with a technical lead."

"The recruiter organized the flow well. My first round was 1 hour interview. When I qualified that round I was scheduled for the final round with 5 interview rounds scheduled on the same day. There was no delay from the recruiting team on informing the status and next steps through out the process."

"The process was pretty simple from the early start, but they emphasize a lot on matching Anduril's core values and see if you're a culture fit. I would have better prepared my stories and gaps for the behavioral interview. There were gaps regarding technical depth and being too ambiguous."

"DSA is the key. Learning problems will not help but understanding them will. I had 2 rounds online (1 technical, 1 behavioral) and 2 technical rounds onsite. Each technical round had 2 questions and one has to do well in every round. I did well on the online rounds and got stuck on 1 question in one of the onsite round. Ultimately, I took more than expected time for 1 question in my last round which I could have done better."

"They cold-reached out to me, and the process felt unusual right away because there were a bunch of reschedules and the 30-minute recruiter screen was basically a real behavioral interview. The weirdest moment on that first call was hearing that comp was 'beyond competitive' and 'never a concern,' and then being told they usually downlevel people one or two levels. After that I had two PM rounds: a brutal Friday product-sense interview with an under-specified memory-machine prompt and almost no feedback, then a Monday metrics round that was a smash and felt much more normal. I got rejected before the final rounds, which were supposed to include org dynamics and another business-alignment style interview. The whole thing felt extremely interviewer-dependent, with one round feeling dismissive and pedestal-y and the next feeling collaborative and genuinely strong."

"I applied online for a mid-level IC3 software engineering role in Apple's hardware org, and a recruiter reached out after the team liked my resume. After a short recruiter chat, I got a 24-hour Python take-home, then a 45-minute technical screen where I walked through the project and solved a palindrome-style coding question. The final loop was remote and split over two days, with six interviews total: a friendly hiring manager chat, a loose AI/system design round, and four Python rounds covering coding, class design, and debugging. Most of the interviewers were nice and the questions felt fair, but the debugging round was the hardest for me and the very last round felt much more like getting grilled. I got the rejection the following Monday, and they would not give any final-round feedback."

"It didn't go as expected. I did not have as many interviews as expected, and overall, the process wasn't great as the recruiter changed midway."

"The interview process was fairly structured, starting with an initial screening followed by technical and/or managerial rounds. What went well was the clarity of questions and the opportunity to explain my thought process. One area that could have been better was the time allocated for certain discussions, which felt slightly rushed."

"The process was very rigorous, more than 12 rounds, met with CRO and CEO. I thought it was overly involved for an L5 role and offer was lower than expected."

"It went pretty well. It was entry level. I think i should have asked more clarifying questions throughout"