You realise most people here would kill for a one hour interview that resulted in a job offer the next day, right?! That's great!
I'd figured there be some follow-up interviews where we can go more in depth of my coding abilities and system architects logic.
IMHO, I'm glad more companies are actually moving away from this style of all-day really in-depth whiteboard / algorithm coding interview technique - as it really tells you very little above and beyond the hour or so interview that you describe:
- It's very easy for any candidate desperate for work to revise that sort of stuff in advance, spit it out on the whiteboard, and be next to useless in the day job. On the other hand, good candidates that may not bother (because they're likely to get hired somewhere decent anyway) might get passed up.
- If someone doesn't have a clue what they're doing, it's very rare that doesn't become apparent in an hour or so's worth of technical conversation. You'd usually smell a rat in the first 5 minutes.
- The longer the process is, the more likely it is that good candidates will receive offers elsewhere in the meantime, and so disappear before the company has a chance to evaluate them.
Nothing shady about it. If anything I'd congratulate them for having an interview process that's quick, short, efficient and to the point.
manpreet![Tuteehub forum best answer]()
Best Answer
2 years ago
I just had an interview for a software developer job and the whole process was simply a 30 minute phone call, followed by a one hour panel interview (around 5 people).
The panel interview went fine but there weren't any whiteboard coding problems or problem solving questions. Just asking about my background and what my experiences are with tech stacks. It felt more like a "meet the team and here's what we do" sort of meeting.
Interested in the project in hand; but I'm finding a hard time believing that a company would hire me solely based on a one hour panel interview. I'd figured there would be some follow-up interviews where we could go more in depth of my coding abilities and system architect's logic. Note that half of the interviewers were interviewing remotely without video. There were software developers in this panel, not just managers.
I'm not sure if this is common practice or if they are hiding something up their sleeves. This company is in the defense industry; an industry whose number one interest is your ability to hold a security clearance (which I currently possess). I've interviewed through a variety of tech companies and this is the first I've seen it going this well.
I've been in a couple companies where software development isn't their forte. I've typically ended up being that "rock star" employee trying to bring the IT/developers up to modern standards. It's not my interest to be that employee again; I want to work in a team who is willing to read a tech article. Meeting with them makes it seems this won't be the case (but I'm an optimistic sort of person).
Should I be concerned over how they conducted their interviewing process or am I just overthinking it?
EDIT: Comment section is blowing up, hard to answer specific questions. This is a full time position and I do have experience in the industry (yes, defense industry). Hope this clears up a few things.