Canonical Python Developer Interview Questions
& Process

The interview process at Canonical is quite involved, often taking weeks or even months to complete. It kicks off with a review of your application, then moves to a detailed written test that's specific to the role, plus a general aptitude test (like the GIA). If you're going for a technical position, there's a technical assessment too. After that, if you pass, you'll have several interview rounds. These include early talks about technical stuff and the specific field you're in, a chat with HR (they might dig into your personality with something like the PPA and discuss pay), and later interviews with the hiring manager and other senior people. Sometimes, you might even end up talking to the CEO as the last step. They really focus on how good you are technically and if you'll fit in with the team, using those written tests and assessments to make things fair for everyone applying from anywhere.

I applied for a Python Developer role at Canonical and heard back quickly. The Hiring Manager liked my CV. First, I had to do a big writing task, a 3-page essay answering personal and professional questions, which took me about a week. They liked the essay. Then, I did a technical OA and passed all the tests. After that, I took the Thomas GIA test, completing all five parts. My scores were 'Acceptable' in four sections and 'Exceptional' in the numerical part. With good feedback on my CV and essay, passing the OA, and decent GIA scores, I was feeling good. But then I got a standard rejection email saying they were going with other people.

This was the worst company I ever interviewed with. The entire process was automated; I went through 4 rounds without ever speaking to a person. It started with an email containing a lot of questions, many of which were irrelevant for a senior role, like how your high school classmates remember you. I didn't answer the questions I found irrelevant, which I suspect led to my rejection. However, these answers weren't reviewed until after I spent several hours on other tests. These included programming exercises on their platform and another test that seemed pointless, involving tasks like determining which of three numbers was furthest from the other two. I completed the programming exercises correctly and on time, and my performance report on the other 'skills' tests indicated I did better than most people on all 5 exercises. But this was all for nothing, as they could have rejected me based on my initial answers. The whole system is designed to save them time, even if it means I wasted many hours on nonsense when I should have been rejected earlier for not answering ridiculous and irrelevant questions.