SANS Institute Interview Questions
& Process

The interview process involved 3 interviews, which were quite straightforward and collaborative. The only downside was that it felt a bit slow. One interview was in person, and the other two were virtual. I'd still recommend it, though. The company seems to be going through some changes, but that might be necessary.

It was a really bad experience, 3 interviews total. First was a 30 minute chat about my resume with a team member. Then a 1-hour interview with the head of analytics where they asked some really weird questions, like naming animals starting with T. The last interview was an hour with a senior analyst, going deep into my resume and skills. They told me I was moving to the final round which would be a project and panel interview. 10 days later, I got a generic rejection email from the person who did the 3rd interview saying I wasn't a good fit. I asked for more details because I'd only gotten positive feedback. It's been a week, no reply. Pretty disappointing given their company values.

So I was put in by a staffing agency, and the whole thing took about 2.5 weeks. Apparently, HR has the final say, so it's a bit weird they didn't just do the HR screen first. Instead, the hiring manager called me first, which went fine. Then I had to do a coding challenge, which took like a week of emails. After that, the hiring manager asked for an HR screen, which took another week to schedule. Usually, HR is first, then the hiring manager, but not here. HR seemed okay during the call, but I later found out I didn't get it because of feedback from the agency. Honestly, I think HR made up the feedback because they found out my salary expectations, which they should have known beforehand. I was even willing to go a bit lower because I liked the manager and the opportunity. SANS could've saved me time by doing the HR screen first, I felt strung along. The manager was great though. It seems like a flawed process where HR has too much power and can reject people arbitrarily. I blame HR for this messed up process. Looking back, it's a blessing in disguise, especially after reading other reviews. I can't imagine how they handle actual employee issues. It was the strangest and least professional interview ever, especially for a big company that's been around since 1989.

It was easy but took a long time and wasn't great overall. Started with a recruiter call, then an interview with the Head of Engineering. That was okay, felt robotic, interviewer read questions. Then I spoke with a team member, that interview went well, straightforward questions. Then an interview with the Director of Engineering. That call also started with, 'I'm going to ask you a list of questions, and then you may ask questions if you have any.' The questions were weird though. Then I didn't hear back, followed up, and the recruiter said they weren't moving forward. Overall, not hard, but the vibe and structure felt off. Also, only being interviewed by men wasn't the most inclusive vibe.