A Pathetic Interview Experience at Cimpress

I recently interviewed with Cimpress, and the experience provided some valuable, albeit frustrating, insights.

The first round was a Data Structures and Algorithms (DSA) round, conducted in C++. I was presented with a problem focused on grouping numbers based on their digital root. For instance, numbers like 321, 6, and 33 would belong to the same group because their digital root is 6. I found this problem engaging and was able to implement a clean solution using in-memory data structures such as maps and vectors, which allowed me to efficiently group the numbers.

Following this, the second round consisted of a Low-Level Design (LLD) and High-Level Design (HLD) question, specifically asking me to design an LRU Cache. This is a fairly common problem, typically tackled by combining a doubly linked list and a hashmap to achieve O(1) time complexity for both `get` and `put` operations. I felt comfortable with the problem and began to explain my well-thought-out approach.

However, the second round's experience wasn't as smooth. I found the interviewer frequently interrupted my explanations, not providing sufficient space for me to articulate my thought process systematically. This made it quite challenging to walk through the design in a coherent manner. While I understand that every interviewer has their unique style, this particular interaction didn't feel very constructive or conducive to a fair assessment of my design skills. It served as a clear reminder that an interview's flow often depends as much on effective communication and active listening from both sides as it does on pure technical ability.

Ultimately, every interview, regardless of its outcome or perceived quality, serves as a learning opportunity. I am sharing this experience to offer insights to others who might be preparing for similar roles and to gently encourage companies to maintain a consistent and empathetic approach in their interview processes.