I applied through a recruiter. The process took 2 months. I interviewed at Google
Interview
Interviewed twice for this role, both times Google HR approached me.
First time was positive experience. Went through whole process (phone screens, all day onsite). Generally a time consuming process to prepare (budget on spending 1-2 weeks) but interesting. Feedback was generally pretty good, and went to hiring committee. In end didn't get role but I felt the feedback and process was fair and well run.
Google then came back 9 months later and asked if would like to try again. Was doubtful as I explained I didn't see I was going to make a 'better' performance doing again. In end was persuaded to give it a go. One upside was I skipped straight to the all day interview.
Unfortunately this is where things fall apart. Due to COVID all the interviews were moved online, which is pretty non ideal for this type of process. The setup lacked a decent whiteboarding solution which seemed amazing for a company like Google.
Interviewers this time round were ok, but definite undercurrent of arrogance and disinterest. One started my call by noting how I'd 'interviewed with us many times before' - neither accurate nor helpful. However overall I felt they went as well as the previous time, if not any better, given circumstances.
Was surprise therefore when feedback was lot more negative. What was more amazing was the HR person mentioned I could reapply again in 12 months, ignoring fact I'd already told him they approached me, and fact I'd done two rounds in 9 months. When I questioned whether they would really interview a 3rd time, assuming I was stupid enough to waste my time on it, he admitted they wouldn't - so he was just reading a script.
Overall 1st experience was a good one, 2nd time very negative.
It's clear that while Google talks a lot about diversity, there is a certain personality profile that they hire, and the interview process is set up to filter aggressively for that (even if unconsciously). In case of product management this means being good at turning out and defending an analytical / design solution to problem in 30 mins, even though the reality is that most examples are considered over weeks or months.
If you don't fit mould, and are better at thinking things over in more considered way, it's going to be a tough and time-consuming process to get through, and quite possibly a miserable experience working there if you do.
Interview questions [1]
Question 1
Calculate the time takes Street View car to collect footage in a city.
I applied online. The process took 6 weeks. I interviewed at Google (Mountain View, CA) in Mar 2020
Interview
TLDR; Took too long to set up the meeting. Felt like HR is overloaded and impersonal. A rejection phone call from HR unfairly raised my hopes.
No genuine touch in the hiring experience. Feels like they just want to scale hiring to go through as many applicants as possible. I felt like such a cog in the machine.
-----
No HR phone screen. Straight to a 45 minute interview with a 7 year Google veteran.
HR sent me a "prep email" with lots of preparation content. Quantity was good but the quality was bad. It was poorly organized, hard to understand, and had too much fluff — even in their recruiting YouTube video.
It looks like the email was compiled over years as an FAQ to deflect HR questions rather than a real study guide. It would have been more relevant to offer old practice questions and old practice answers.
The PM question was good. Interesting and fun. More unique than Lyft's "design Lyft for commuters". The interviewer was also friendlier than Lyft's brusque NYC attitude. But I thought it was a bad idea to have a 7-year company veteran interview. It felt like they were hiring for last year’s needs and last year’s way of thinking. Someone who’s newer to the company would have been better.
Worst part was taking a long time to hear back (over 3 weeks). They must rule by committee over there. Then the HR person wanted to call me. Missed two scheduled meetings and not responsive over email. Finally she called me just to communicate a rejection.
Google's practice of having a "let down" phone call is unfair. It’s worse than a standard rejection email. They RAISE my hopes just to HIT THEM DOWN. At the very least they could offer some feedback, even if very generic. Are they trying to “not be evil”? They’re having the opposite effect. Raising my hopes to put them down IS EVIL.
Sounds like they just do this rejection call to keep positive word-of-mouth alive. To keep me from posting something like this on Glassdoor. Oops. Looks like I already hit the submit button.
I applied through an employee referral. The process took 1 day. I interviewed at Google (Tokio) in Mar 2020
Interview
1 Self-introduction.
2 The interviewer picks one of my projects and asked the detailed question.
3 Product Design Question.
4 Feedbacks and Suggestions based on my solutions to the Product Design Question.
5 Q & A