Software engineering candidates at Attentive describe a recruiter conversation, a manager or coding session that includes a project discussion, and in one case an onsite. Expect unclear prompts and confirm the language and team up front.
$196K
Avg. Base Comp
$300K
Avg. Total Comp
Not reported
Typical Rounds
Not reported
Process Length
The candidate reports on Attentive's software engineering interviews are few and mixed, and none of the three that describe the software loop ended in an accepted offer. They are still useful for what they flag: coding prompts that can be vague, a stack that may not be spelled out, and a process some found loosely organized.
The clearest pattern is ambiguity in the coding round. A software developer candidate was asked to write a Python function, but the interviewer did not explain the question clearly and was unhelpful when asked to repeat it, so the candidate worked from their own assumptions. A senior backend candidate was given a problem in a language that appeared in neither the job description nor their resume, and had about 30 minutes to solve it. Confirm the language in writing before any technical round, and practice restating inputs, outputs and edge cases aloud before you start typing.
A senior/staff candidate described a one-hour session with an engineering manager, split evenly between an equilibrium index problem (with a 0-based indexing twist) and a project deep dive. Be ready to explain a past project in real depth as well as to code live.
Team matching also came up. That same candidate was told interviews happen for the company as a whole before team matching, so ask the recruiter early which team and stack the role targets. The senior backend candidate ended with a downlevel offer and declined it, so it is worth asking about level expectations before an onsite.
Synthesized from 6 candidate reports by our editorial team.
Had an interview recently?
Share your experience. Unlock the full guide.
Real interview reports from people who went through the Attentive process.
I interviewed at Attentive for a senior backend role, and the process felt disorganized from the start. After my initial conversation with the recruiter, they passed my resume to the team. A few days went by with no word, so I followed up—only to be told they'd already decided to move forward with other candidates. That was frustrating, but I decided to push through anyway.
Things got more chaotic when I made it to the technical rounds. I was told I did really well early on and was scheduled for an onsite, which was encouraging. Then came the shock: I was asked to solve a coding problem in a programming language I'd never used before and that wasn't mentioned anywhere in the job description or my resume. To make it worse, the interviewer showed up late, took forever introducing themselves, and then just watched silently while I scrambled to solve it in 30 minutes. I did my best given the circumstances, but afterward I was told I'd performed well in most interviews except that one—and the result was a downlevel offer, which I declined.
The whole experience felt misaligned. In my other interactions with the hiring manager, they came across as knowledgeable but inflexible, more focused on finding someone perfect rather than building out the team. The lack of clarity about tech stack, combined with the disorganization around timing and the unexpected language requirement, made the whole thing feel like it wasn't a great fit anyway.
Prep tip from this candidate
Before any technical round, explicitly confirm the exact programming languages you'll be tested on—in writing. If a company springs an unexpected language or framework on you, flag it immediately rather than struggling through it.
Share your own interview experience to unlock all reports, or subscribe for full access.
Sourced from candidate reports and verified by our team.
Topics based on recent interview experiences.
Featured question at Attentive
Write a function n_frequent_words that returns the top N frequent words and their frequencies, and state its run-time
| Question | |
|---|---|
| 2nd Highest Salary | |
| Empty Neighborhoods | |
| Top Three Salaries | |
| Merge Sorted Lists | |
| Random SQL Sample | |
| Closest SAT Scores | |
| Subscription Overlap | |
| Upsell Transactions | |
| Top 3 Users | |
| Monthly Customer Report | |
| Rolling Bank Transactions | |
| Find Bigrams | |
| Longest Streak Users | |
| Prime to N | |
| Customer Orders | |
| Comments Histogram | |
| Size of Joins | |
| Paired Products | |
| Find the First Non-Repeating Character in a String | |
| String Shift | |
| Raining in Seattle | |
| Google Maps Improvement | |
| Find the Missing Number | |
| Scrambled Tickets | |
| Total Spent on Products | |
| Duplicate Rows | |
| Flight Records | |
| Last Transaction | |
| Minimum Change |
Synthesized from candidate reports. Individual experiences may vary.
Candidates describe an initial recruiter contact. One senior/staff candidate was approached on LinkedIn and told that candidates interview for the company as a whole before team matching. A senior backend candidate had a first conversation and then waited days for news. Ask which languages and team the role targets.
A senior/staff candidate reports an hour with an engineering manager, split between an equilibrium index problem with 0-based indexing and a project deep dive. A software developer candidate was asked to write a Python function from an unclear prompt. Practice restating requirements and edge cases aloud.
A senior backend candidate who was scheduled for an onsite was asked to code in an unfamiliar language that wasn't in the job description, with about 30 minutes to solve it. That candidate received a downlevel offer and declined. The senior/staff candidate heard a rejection a week later with no real explanation.
