Inductive Automation Interview Questions
& Process

The interview process started with a standard recruiter call where they reviewed my resume and asked a few questions about the job, mostly just checking for keywords from the description. I focused on highlighting my skills and experience. However, during the final interview, I discovered the role actually required expertise in a totally different area, which was quite frustrating. I felt like I had prepared for something I might not have even applied for if the initial screening had been clearer. I think the HR team could do a better job vetting candidates for technical roles. The company seems good, but they need to be more transparent early on, especially when recruiters aren't technical, to save everyone time.

I went through two rounds of interviews back in March 2025. The first one was online via Google Meet, and we chatted for about 45 minutes about my background, the job, what I know about the company, and a few basic technical things. The second interview was in person and actually had two parts. The first part was with HR/recruiter, focusing more on behavioral stuff and my background. The second part was with the technical support/engineers, and it was more technical, including a quick assessment with 2 SQL and 2 Python questions. That whole in-person interview took around 2 hours.

The initial rounds were pretty standard, with HR asking behavioral questions. The amount of paperwork was excessive, including NDAs, disability disclosures, and a full work history/reference form on top of what was already in the resume. They also ask you to arrive early but then make you wait past your appointment time. HR seemed great, and the process was smooth until the final round. The HR director warned me about the executive I'd be interviewing with and advised me to be as positive as possible. This became clear during the interview; the executive seemed stern and tired. I was a minute late because the Google Meet link required enabling hardware acceleration in the browser, which I explained. It seemed hypocritical given the unprofessionalism. The final round was short, I was asked to study the product beforehand, then give a simple explanation with no follow-up. It felt like the executive had already decided against me due to being one minute late. While businesses operate differently, it seems a bit ridiculous.

The first two interviews were pretty chill. One was a behavioral chat, asking stuff like 'where do you see yourself in 5 years?' and 'describe a time you've dealt with conflict in your team'. The other was a bit more technical, but still mostly behavioral. I also had to do a coding assessment that I had 24 hours to finish. It was super easy, just basic python and sql questions, nothing like leetcode or algorithms. Before I even submitted it though, they contacted me saying I'd be a better fit for a different role. I decided not to move forward with that.