Vercel Interview Questions
& Process

Candidate had a poor experience and had to follow up multiple times. The assessment via MeritFirst was the WORST (weird/bad user interface, requiring specific systems to simply take a test, & also repetitive). The actual subject matter was easy, but they need to reconsider how they are treating and selecting top applicants. Highly recommend that you do not interview with Vercel. They are reposting/boosting this role and it's doubtful they aren't finding qualified candidates. Since candidate experience was not top of mind, you will not have a good time here. As a current RC, if a company cannot give you a great candidate experience to the owners of candidate experience, what does that tell you?

The interview process at Vercel felt rushed, disorganized, and unnecessarily high pressure. I was first scheduled to speak with the hiring manager before ever having a recruiter screen, which made the process feel backwards and confusing. About halfway through the process, they switched recruiters and while they explained it was to improve coordination, it still came off as unstructured. The most frustrating part was the working session. I was given a complex billing dataset and expected to complete a detailed list of questions during the call with only 30 minutes. It felt more like a pop quiz than a fair evaluation, and it created a lot of unnecessary pressure, especially with someone watching over your shoulder the entire time. In my next interview, the hiring manager ended the call abruptly after I answered a revenue recognition question incorrectly. There was no follow up, no attempt to dig deeper into my thought process, just “That’s all for me today” and the interview ended early. It felt dismissive and frankly unprofessional. Overall, I came in genuinely interested in the role, but I left the process feeling undervalued. Interviewing should be a two way street but here, it felt like the focus was entirely on testing under pressure, not getting to know the candidate’s actual skills or potential.

It was pretty good! I spoke with a head person, then my boss, then the founder, and then my boss again. I also chatted with two more people after getting the offer. There was some discussion about AI and Vercel's future, like how Next.js is a big part of it and how AI will automate tasks but not replace people. Vercel is seen as well-positioned for the future, and Next.js is described as 'concrete in the AI world' because it's been around and has data. Also talked about how joining Vercel is good for your tech reputation and gives your resume a boost since they are the 'creators of Next.js'.

So, I initially talked to the recruiter, then had a phone screen. After that, I met with my potential manager in the US. Then I met with the in-country manager, followed by a values chat with a US-based AE. They also gave me a presentation exercise that took about two days to prep, plus some extra assignments like researching prospects and creating messaging, which felt like unpaid work. After all that, I did the final panel presentation and interview. I didn't hear anything for over a week and a half, even though they knew I had other offers I was holding off on. I had to chase them for updates. After almost two weeks, they told me no offer, and I had to ask for feedback. They said it wasn't about my skills or interviews, but they picked someone else based on some extra criteria not in the job description, like a background in software development/engineering, which they never mentioned. This put me at a disadvantage because I couldn't tailor my approach. It felt unfair and biased, and the delays made the whole process seem really opaque and inequitable. If they had just been upfront about preferring candidates with dev/eng experience, I wouldn't have wasted my time. Overall, it felt like an inefficient use of my time due to the lack of transparency, unfair decision criteria, and communication delays, which caused unnecessary stress.