The interview process was a total of three months, which is crazy for a major tech company in this market. First conversation was with a recruiter (who was lovely), the second conversation was with the hiring manager, then they moved me to the panel interview round which went great. After that, I did not hear from them for some time only to be told they wanted to interview me one more time with just 2 more people… did that. Radio silence again. Followed up only to be told that they loved me and wanted to make an offer but one individual decided that I did not have the “experience” needed (which was evident from my resume before they ever contacted me in the 1st place to interview me multiple times) but decided to re-open the position after putting me (and I assume others) through unreasonably long interview processes. The total interview process took 3 months of being strung along, which I find to be very absurd and dismissive of candidates’ time. Kinda put a sour taste in my mouth about the company’s hiring practices. Regardless, the actual interview process was not challenging and I actually did quite enjoy my conversations with the various people I spoke to. However, the process itself has to be fixed because this is how you lose good candidates forever because what’s stopping them from wasting time again?
Interview questions [1]
Question 1
Describe how you would handle interactions with business team vs. law firm interactions
I applied online. The process took 2 weeks. I interviewed at X in Dec 2017
Interview
Started with a basic 10 minute recruiter conversation and then had a scheduled 1 hour phone screen two weeks later with two in-house attorneys....well, it was mainly a junior attorney who was nice and then a senior attorney who joined 20 minutes late, then proceeded to hijack the interview for 20 minutes with a mix of abrasive humor and random gotcha questions, before leaving 20 minutes early to let the junior attorney to finish the interview. Perhaps I could have been better at answering the senior attorney's questions (though they were purely fact questions that you either knew the answer to or didn't), but he came across really poorly and as if he had his mind made up from the start and was trying to make me feel as uncomfortable as possible for the 20 minutes while he was one.
FWIW, a former first-year associate who became legendary within my law firm for laziness/incompetence before leaving within 6 months now works at Twitter in-house.
Interview questions [1]
Question 1
Why do you want to work in-house? Why Twitter? What you hope to achieve or get out of the role. Questions about legal practice areas. More specific questions about familiarity of certain technological concepts. A few general or confirming questions about past positions.
I applied online. The process took 1 day. I interviewed at X (San Francisco, CA) in Jul 2015
Interview
2 phone screens (with hypotheticals), followed by 4.5 hours of interviews with 8 employees. Each interview lasted 30 minutes and was composed of answering numerous hypotheticals. Interviewers were pleasant, though each would continue to twist hypotheticals into very challenging situations. After the first few hours, it was pretty exhausting. They do not give you any breaks and most would just start right off with hypotheticals. It might be easier if Twitter just set up a room, brought in a bunch of people and gave you an all day essay exam. I have interviewed at other top tech companies, and their interviews focused much more on experience and character. If they treat you like this as an candidate, I can't even image what it would be like to work there.
Interview questions [1]
Question 1
Why do you want to work at Twitter? What value would you bring to Twitter? Why do you want this role at Twitter?
