Applied online. Quick chat with recruiter, quick chat with hiring manager, basic coding interview with 2 engineers on coderpad, then scheduled 4 more interviews for: Coding, System Design, Product, and meeting with Director of Engineering. Early in the process the recruiter also sent me some links to do Predictive Index's Behavior and Cognitive assessments. The recruiter mentioned there was no rush on these, they mostly just needed to be done before the final stages of the hiring process. For the most part scheduling and early interactions were done quickly. Chatting with the hiring manager was nice and got to learn about the position and projects. The coding interview was pretty basic but generally fine. From there things were a little bit messy, the 2nd coding interview was structed as a Ruby on Rails problem, but in coderpad it wasn't actually setup in a Rails app. This was fine just a little unrealistic in how you would actually solve the problem because you don't have all the tools of the framework. Other than that it was an easy test. It did feel a little thrown together last minute though rather than something they might have prepared for candidates properly. After that I met with a Director of product. This was fairly straightforward, we discussed things related to how engineering and product work together. He did show up to this call 5-10 minutes late. Immediately after I had a call with a Director of Engineering. Like the previous chat, he also showed up about 10 minutes late. This was a little annoying considering you're taking hours out of your day to get these interviews done. This chat was pretty basic, just talking about some previous experiences dealing with specific situations. He seemed slightly distracted, but I get it he's probably a super busy guy. But that on top of being late wasn't a great look. Finally the next day I had the System Design interview. Except I showed up, waited 10 minutes on Zoom thinking "Okay I guess it's just normal that everyone shows up late, but just in case let me email the recruiter/interview coordinator". I let them know that I'd been in the call for 10 minutes and the interviewer hadn't shown up and that I'd give it another 5 or 10 minutes just in case and if not we could reschedule. They never showed up and I didn't hear back from the recruiter for over a day only to be told that they decided to move forward with another candidate instead. I don't mind if they didn't think things went well during part of this process, but just not showing up to a scheduled interview and then not saying anything about it is pretty sloppy and unprofessional. Some feedback for Spring Health would be... make sure everyone that does interviews is properly prepared and trained, and try to make sure the prioritize showing up on time (or at least within a few minutes, having 2 people show up 10 minutes late and one not at all is not great). Or at least on the scheduling side make sure everyone has enough buffer between their meetings so that they have time in case certain things run long that they don't run over other meetings.

Started with an intro interview with a recruiter. The recruiter was helpful throughout the entire interview process (which is a little long.) This initial chat was 30-minute or so. They have you fill out a "behavioral assessment." I suppose it's a kind of personality test and felt a little odd. This maybe took 15 minutes. Next they have you do a timed "cognitive assessment." I personally did not like this part of the interview. The test CLAIMS it's "not an IQ test," but it sure did feel like one. You MUST do a practice assessment in order to succeed. I think it was a 20-minute timer, but that time doesn't include the practice assessment. Then they had me interview with a tech lead on the team. It was a nice chat with a nice person. 45-minutes. Next were two separate live technical interviews which were good and not too unreasonable. It was also odd that there were two assessments. While they explained the differences, I still felt like there didn't need to be two. I generally do not like live coding assessments, but they at least seemed to focus on how I work instead of "correct answers." I didn't feel too much pressure from interviewers who acted more like coworkers than proctors. Each technical assessment was 45-minutes, but they both went over a bit because I had questions. One concerning part of the process was the interview with their VP who heavily emphasized being "adaptable." To me, this is kind of a red flag, but one I was willing to see past. If after nine years this company is still prioritizing adaptability to changing constraints, then that might be a sign of a few internal issues. Something to consider. This was also 45 minutes. They finally asked me to gather three references. Not sure if they called them because I received a rejection letter shortly after that (don't worry, my friends didn't torpedo me.) To summarize everything, there were three different 30-45 minute conversational interviews, two 45-minute technical assessments, a 20-minute timed "cognitive assessment" and a reference check. While I think everyone was friendly and answered my questions confidently, I think I'm ultimately going to disapprove of the experience. It did not feel particularly respectful of my time and effort and had elements that I felt could be unfair to some (like the cognitive and behavioral assessments.) I know interviewing is something companies are always trying to improve on, so perhaps when you read this review they will have tweaked their process. But, this was what it was for me at time of writing.