I applied through a recruiter. The process took 2 weeks. I interviewed at Indeed (Austin, TX)
Interview
In-person in Seattle, one one-hour whiteboard, one 1.5 hour programming exercise. On-site in Austin, full day of several whiteboard interviews for algorithms, a code review, an architecture discussion, and a debrief with director-levels. Questions relevant to search engines, scaling data processing, and architecture of web services (while still requiring implementation of algorithms).
Interview questions [1]
Question 1
Describe how you would implement a resume storage and search system.
I applied through a recruiter. The process took 3 months. I interviewed at Indeed (Tokyo) in May 2014
Interview
Algorithm Test / position explanation
Making natural language processing code
The code should be done in certain time
About Tokyo office team and relationship with U.S. team
Interview
With 2 engineers and translator for me
Using whiteboard
Thinking process
Technical conversation
I applied through a recruiter. The process took 1 day. I interviewed at Indeed (Seattle, WA) in Jul 2015
Interview
Phone screen then invited to be onsite interview. 3 hours face-to-face meeting a bunch of people, from manager to team members. First started with real coding, then whiteboard coding. Process and questions were well organized, people were nice.
Interview questions [1]
Question 1
Well organized questions. First started with a coding session on a computer, they asked me about the language and platform I prefer. The question was quite simple and straightforward. Unfortunately a text file opened on the screen looked like a build script attracted my attention, made me feel I should follow to build the code, it was not. Spent some time on it, then gave up, went back to my old way, found no much time left. Eventually able to debug, made the code work partially. First time in a long while to do such a thing, I was pretty rusty, also spent time to figure out what to do and how to do. So overall the result wasn't perfect.
Then whiteboard interview. The air was good, started with greetings. I mistook that was a discussion rather than looking for a real solution. Provided several non-optimistic solution, eventually started writing code. Didn't think through the solution, so ran into mistakes. Also showed some fundamental misunderstanding on some concepts. On the way back, I thought through the solution, found the question was quite a match to their daily work. Wasn't my thing, but I should have done better; I was in a full time job, worked late in previous night\morning, could be an excuse to forgive myself.
Overall the questions were well organized and made lots sense to ask in an interview. I should have done better.