The interview consisted in a screening HR interview and a technical interview with one of their techies. The technical component was easy to solve but the atmosphere was tense throughout; the interviewer made zero efforts to establish a relaxed atmosphere, no smiles, no pleasantries, etc. It was evident that he thought a lot of himself, and he enjoyed being in a position of perceived power on the other side of the table. After solving the technical challenge in the allocated time, it took a few days before being told that I didn't make the cut and more than a week to get some feedback. I was puzzeled to learn that the techie considered the solution to be unoptimized but even more surprised to be told that while I completed the task in the allocated 40min time, candidates who solved it under 30 minutes scored more points... My takeaways from this experience: 1. The company values rushed work, with no consideration for the things that are missed in doing that (quality code for one). It could be an indication of rushing in other areas (project work, annual reviews, etc). 2. The company doesn't have a reputation of being ethnically diverse and they like to hire from a specific demographic (you will know which one after the interviews). While they will never admit it (they can't, can they), a candidate should ask themselves if they really want to to work there. 3. I was left with the impression that they conducted the interview just because they are obligated to do a number of them before they go ahead with a candidate they already chose beforehand, and if this is true it is not only unprofessional but a waste of time for the candidates. My advice to the company? 1. Get someone senior to do the interviews, not a regular techie on a power trip. People skills are important (or should be). Interviewers are the window into your company and how they conduct themselves is a reflection of the company as a whole. 2. Be upfront about the rules, you can’t ask for a solution in 40 minutes only to tell the candidate after the interview that you prioritise candidates that do it under 30 minutes. It feels like an arbitrary rule made on the spot to justify having selected someone else. 3. Judging candidates by their ability to deliver a solution under severe time constraints is a lazy way of interviewing and a red flag for the company on many levels. Someone senior will not necessarily finish the task faster than others, as they consider scenarios that juniors miss all the time. If anything, seniors will be slower but the solution provided can be trusted on design, scalability, maintainability and many other things that are important.