1. Online Assessment: I was given 90 minutes to solve two programming challenges. These are around Medium difficulty if compared to CTCI or similar source, but with a couple extra needless complications thrown in (e.g. you need to perform some regex on the input before feeding data to your algorithm). I did well on these and was invited to Seattle. 2. On-site: Five hour-long interviews, plus a lunch non-interview with a team member. Every interviewer asked me for highly detailed examples from my work history that assess whether or not I align with their leadership principles. This was a very exhausting process. More than a few questions were either so specific they didn't apply to any of my experience, or so vague as to apply to all of my experience. I did not expect this quantity of behavioral-style questions, as it was advertised as a tech interview, so I felt unprepared in this area and that didn't do me any favors. The technical questions were medium difficulty (actually easier than the online assessment), but a couple interviewers made them much more difficult by interrupting me or changing their minds as to what the problem even was. I'll just go over the Bar Raiser interview. This guy was being trained by another Bar Raiser, so there were two Bar Raisers for this round, but only one of them conducted the interview. This guy seemed very angry from the start. He didn't seem to understand the nuances between being an aggressive interviewer and being actively hostile. I put his attitude asside and focused on his questions. He asked the usual leadership questions but he really drilled down and wanted an absurd level of detail, like what % growth did your company experience after that bug fix, etc. His tech question was something I would have had no problem working out if he actually let me. Instead, he kept interrupting me and forcing me to explain "the connection" between two types of data. I had written that connection on the whiteboard earlier, so I assumed he meant some other connection. Not seeing any other connection, I went over the whole problem again and definitely repeated the connection he was after. He was unsatisfied and he kept repeating himself, "What is the connection...what is the connection..." Anyway, time ran out and he told me the connection. I pointed to the diagram on the board where I had illustrated this, but he didn't seem to care. It's as though he wanted to waste the entire interview and see how I would react. This interview showcased to me that I would be incompatible with the corporate culture at Amazon. I don't like angry coworkers, and I don't like it when they waste my time playing mind games. If you are selected to interview here, and you feel the culture might be a fit for your personality, you really need to nail the leadership style questions, so go in with at least 20 stories about how you single-handedly altered the course of history for the better. Also, be lucky! I've heard that counts for a lot. Getting a bad Bar Raiser is more than enough to sink your chances of getting an offer. Anyway, I didn't get an offer but the recruiter suggested I reapply immediately for something else. However, this experience really turned me off of Amazon, and I will not interview with them again.