Tremendous Interview Questions
& Process

It kicked off with a recruiter chat, which was nice. After that, there was another technical screen with a straightforward, non-Leetcode question. Then came the take-home part, which was also the final interview. For that, I had to design a solution to a technical problem and then code it out over several stages during the 'virtual onsite'. The whole thing was pretty standard, and I liked that it wasn't full of those typical Leetcode-style puzzles. However, the take-home question itself wasn't great. They said it was about seeing how I solve problems and design technical solutions, but it really felt like they wanted a very specific answer that I was supposed to come up with on my own. It does let you show your thinking, but in the end, it seems like they just want you to reach the same conclusions they did, which felt a bit off.

I think there were 5 rounds for this job. The first was a 20-minute call with the recruiter. They asked me some questions and confirmed details like the pay range. Then, I had to do a take-home exercise where I reviewed 20 resumes and selected the top 3 for a role, explaining my choices. It was supposed to take 30-45 minutes, but I spent longer since I was really interested. The second round was a 30-minute live task where I looked at LinkedIn profiles and had to say which candidates I'd contact and why. I guess I didn't do well because I got a rejection email the next day with no feedback. I asked for feedback but never got it. The interviewers were nice and efficient, but the overall process wasn't great. It felt impersonal and automated, and I didn't feel like I got to fully show what I could do. For interviews where candidates get past the phone screen and do tasks, the hiring team should give feedback. It's just common courtesy.

I had an initial screen with the recruiter, then an interview with the hiring manager, and finally a panel interview with the founder, hiring manager, and product marketing manager. I really believe in the company and their future in the one-stop-payment space, and I've heard good things from others who got offers. I felt I connected well with the hiring manager and had good discussions, but the final panel interview, which I spent a lot of time preparing for, ended with a generic 'not a good fit' email. They then reposted the job, which makes me feel like they're looking for free consulting instead of hiring. I studied over 100 customer reviews, all 30 customer stories, and their case study, focusing on their biggest challenge: helping sales reps find and sell based on pain points rather than the product. I condensed this into slides. I think they're looking for someone to execute specific projects they have in mind rather than solve real problems. For example, they asked for a one-pager content piece that I presented, but then they wanted to review it again separately? I wish them the best but would appreciate some feedback for the effort I put in. If you're interviewing, I'd suggest focusing on what you think the PM team wants rather than what would truly help the company close deals faster.

The whole interview process took just under 4 weeks. It started with a 30-minute recruiter screen, followed by a 1-hour technical screen using Coderpad. Then there was a take-home assignment that took about 1-2 hours, which was then reviewed in a 45-minute session. After that, there were two coding sessions: a 2-hour 15-minute back-end coding session done on your own machine, and a 1-hour 30-minute front-end coding session on Coderpad. The process wrapped up with a 30-minute behavioral/experience interview. I really liked that they did a technical screen before the take-home, unlike many companies that start with a long take-home that can take up to 10 hours and often has little feedback. Doing the technical screen first helps them quickly identify candidates with the necessary technical skills and saves everyone time. They provided a repository to study for the take-home, which was also used in the back-end coding part, and gave plenty of time to get it set up on my machine instead of coding in an online editor. For both coding portions, they'd discuss the problem, leave the meeting, and let me code for most of the time, which reduced my interview anxiety. They were also upfront about not trying to trick candidates, and the questions were relevant to daily work. Communication was excellent, with clear documents about the process, take-home, and FAQs. Although the interviews themselves weren't extremely hard, there were many of them, making the process feel lengthy. However, it's clear Tremendous is thorough in hiring, and given my experience with startups hiring quickly just to meet numbers, this detailed process didn't bother me. While the interview went well, the role required Ruby/Rails experience, which I didn't have, and this was a dealbreaker. If you have Ruby/Rails experience and want to work at a profitable company with few meetings and high autonomy, I recommend applying.