LinkedIn (Staff Software Engineer Applications) ( Reject )

linkedin logo
linkedin
Staff Software Engineer ApplicationsRejected
March 28, 20250 reads

Summary

I completed a full-loop interview process for a Staff Software Engineer position at LinkedIn, which resulted in a rejection. Although I performed well in the design, craftsmanship, and leadership rounds, my performance in the coding challenges, especially concerning specific algorithmic solutions and explanations, was a critical factor in the outcome.

Full Experience

Qualifier Coding Round

This round focused on designing a data structure with O(1) time complexity for retrieves, updates, deletes, and retrieving keys with maximum and minimum frequency.

Coding Round 1

I tackled a variant of the Rat in a Maze problem, emphasizing pure OOP principles like readability, maintainability, testability, and time complexity. I felt it went well, though I initially missed one edge case, which I later corrected.

Design Round

The problem involved designing a system to fetch top articles shared by users within various time windows (15 min, 60 min, 24 hours). The interviewer later extended this to more granular and dynamic time intervals. I discussed solutions leveraging Apache Flink for stream processing, including handling windowing, aggregation, fault tolerance, and out-of-order events. Despite my efforts, the feedback indicated my dynamic window solution wasn't accurate enough.

Craftsmanship Round

This round was a discussion about project metrics, CI/CD processes, Reactive Systems, and other technical topics. I believe I performed well here.

Leadership Round

The focus was on leadership and in-depth discussions of projects I had led. I felt confident in my performance in this round.

Coding Round 2

In the second coding round, I was given two problems. The first was to check if a number is a power of 2. The second, more challenging, was to find the node least number of edges away from any other node in a binary tree. For the second problem, my initial DFS-based solution wasn't what the interviewer expected; they preferred BFS. I fumbled a bit trying to explain my approach, as they seemed to be looking for a more perfect and optimized solution.

Ultimately, I was rejected. My struggles in the coding rounds, particularly with the specific algorithmic approaches and explanations, were highlighted as the primary reason, reinforcing the expectation for flawless solutions.

Interview Questions (5)

Q1
Design Data Structure for Max/Min Frequency Keys
Data Structures & Algorithms

Design a data structure that retrieves and updates and deletes data based on keys, and retrieves the keys with the maximum and minimum frequency in O(1) time.

Q2
Rat in a Maze (OOP Variant)
Data Structures & Algorithms

The task required defining classes and methods and implementing them using pure OOP principles. Focus areas: Readability, Maintainability, Testability, Time Complexity.

Q3
Design System for Top Articles by Share Frequency (Dynamic Time Windows)
System Design

Design a system to fetch the top articles shared by users in the last 15 minutes, 60 minutes, and 24 hours. The interviewer adjusted the problem to include more fine-grained time intervals (e.g., 1 min, 2 min, 3 min) and wanted a solution flexible for changing time windows at any time.

Q4
Check if a Number is a Power of 2
Data Structures & Algorithms

Check if a number is a power of 2.

Q5
Find Node Least Edges Away from Any Other Node in Binary Tree
Data Structures & Algorithms

Find the node that is the least number of edges away from any other node in a binary tree.

Discussion (0)

Share your thoughts and ask questions

Join the Discussion

Sign in with Google to share your thoughts and ask questions

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts and start the discussion!