Initial screen, tech/coding screen with outsourced company and final rounds with team leads. Took a while to get coordinated and get feedback but went through the whole process. Recruiters were awesome to work with but I felt like I interviewed well enough with the team. If anything, I think they were probably basing their decision off of some subjective judgment call of a few people versus actual output/skills - which tells me that this is probably not a great place to work since its not based on hard work and merit but on favoritism. The feedback I got was that they are finding candidates who have experience in the current initiatives for the data science team which I've done and have experience in with my current/previous roles so I don't think this was actually valid feedback. Anyway - I think I dodged a bullet and wish the company the very best of luck - just a bit peeved that they took so long and gave half-hearted and feckless feedback versus anything legitimate. You can do better.
Solicité el puesto a través de la recomendación de un empleado. El proceso duró 4 semanas. Acudí a una entrevista en Stash
Entrevista
Stash is a rapidly-growing, early-stage fin-tech startup dedicated to helping the average American invest money. I was referred by a current employee to start the interview process for as a Data Scientist/Analyst. I had a 30-minute phone screen with a recruiter at the company, and then was given a take-home technical assessment. (The next steps would've been a technical phone screen and then an on-site.) I asked the recruiter some follow-up questions about the assessment, and she said she'd get back to me, but she never did. I emailed her my submission about 2 weeks later, only to be told that they were no longer hiring for that role.
It's annoying (i.e. waste of time) but understandable that the company's needs are constantly changing, so their hiring needs might rapidly change as well. However, it's extra annoying that their recruiters aren't pro-actively contacting existing candidates to let them know that their candidacy has been obviated. This seems like some wasted time that could've been saved. I still have a very positive view of Stash as a company, but like many early-stage start-ups, their recruiting team is not necessarily up to par, so I'd definitely recommend candidates being more pro-active about checking in with recruiters at the company.
Preguntas de entrevista [1]
Pregunta 1
Asked about my prior work experience.
Asked about my desired compensation level (which seems like the new thing NY-based companies are doing since they can no longer legally ask about past compensation numbers).
Envié una solicitud electrónica. El proceso duró 3 semanas. Acudí a una entrevista en Stash (New York, NY) en ago 2018
Entrevista
-Applied online. HR reached out
-Conduct takehome test (some data analytics/ regression/)
-Onsite meet with 4 team members
First 2 interviews asked a lot of details regarding machine learning/ some programming, but nothing too in-depth. Questions were easy.
3rd interviewing was data analytics manager, and had pandas whiteboarding. To me, this is not a good whiteboard. This is a simple question that can be solved with 5 min of google or stackoverflow. This neither tests how you think nor your knowledge with regards to machine learning/statistics/ML problem formulation.
4th interviewer was head of Data Science. Asked simple questions again. She didn't seem interested.
Reached back out to me in a week, and I was rejected. I answered all technical questions, dont know why. Maybe they looking for someone to bring huge change to their teams. Anyway, good practice
HR (recruiter) is okay. She is reaching out to me to explain the decision. I actually REALLY want to find out their reason. Maybe over-qualify? lol
