Eight Sleep Product Manager Interview Questions
& Process

The early parts of the hiring process were pretty good, with some interesting talks with leaders, and I liked how those behavioral interviews helped check if I was a good fit for the company and the job. But, the take-home project and the panel interview that came next were really tough and didn't make for a great candidate experience. The take-home assignment was a lot, asking for a detailed project plan and testing strategy for a new company launch, but with hardly any details, so I had to make a bunch of guesses, which took a lot of time and was unclear. Plus, the 72-hour deadline was over a weekend, which just added stress without any room for flexibility. I didn't even get to present my work to explain my assumptions or have a real discussion. For the panel interview, it seemed like they barely looked at my submission before the meeting, which became obvious during our chat. They started asking questions that went beyond the assignment, like about targeting new customers, KPIs, and strategy frameworks. These are good topics, but they weren't part of the assignment's focus or the limited info I got. They acted like it was an executive review, giving harsh, on-the-spot feedback on parts of my work without letting me explain my thinking. It felt awkward and super high-pressure, not like a normal collaborative work environment where you'd have support and inside info. To make things worse, a VP just left the call without saying anything, which also felt unprofessional. It really seemed like they didn't care about the time and effort I put into the take-home since they didn't review it properly or discuss it. Honestly, it felt like a mismatch in what we expected, and the assignment being so open-ended, plus the panel not being prepared, made it a really uncomfortable situation. For future candidates, it would be better if they made the assignment's scope clearer, allowed time to present the work to provide context, and made sure the panel was on the same page about how they were evaluating things to make it a more productive and respectful experience.

Process was pretty smooth overall. First, I talked with the hiring manager, and then I spoke with VPs from different parts of the company. There was also a take-home assignment.

So the beginning of the interview process was pretty good, with some interesting chats with the leaders, which felt like good behavioral interviews that helped see if I was a good fit for the company and the role. But then the take-home project and the panel interview part got pretty rough and made the whole experience not so great. The take-home assignment was huge, asking for a detailed project plan and testing plan for a new company launch, but there wasn't much info given. I had to make a bunch of guesses, which took forever and was really unclear. Plus, the 72-hour deadline was over a weekend, which was just stressful and inflexible. I didn't even get to present my work to explain my assumptions or have a real discussion about it. Then, for the panel interview, it seemed like they barely looked at my submission beforehand, with some guys only reviewing it like 45 minutes before we talked. The questions they asked went way beyond the assignment, even though they were good topics. It felt more like an executive review where they just gave harsh feedback on the spot without letting me explain my ideas or choices. It was super high-pressure and not like a normal collaborative work situation where you'd have support and inside knowledge. To top it off, one person just left the call randomly without saying anything, which was really unprofessional. It felt like all the time and work I put into the take-home wasn't valued because they didn't really review it or talk about it properly. In the end, it was clear we had different expectations, but the assignment being so open-ended, and the panel not being prepared or having a real discussion, made it really awkward. For others, it would be better if the assignment was clearer, if there was time to present and explain, and if the panelists were all on the same page about what they were evaluating.