Lab49 interview questions in Washington DC

I was contacted by an in-house recruiter. The process took 5 days. I interviewed at Lab49 (Washington, DC) in December 2015. I was contacted by internal recruiter and had an initial multiple-choice interview with her. Not hard questions, but would weed out people that don't actually know web development. Then I had an online/phone interview with a developer. This was conducted through CoderPad which worked well. He had an initial outline of a program and had me fill in a missing part. He explained CoderPad, the problem, and what he wanted. As I worked on it I did do a few things wrong, ran the code, saw the problems, and corrected them. He kept me talking as I was debugging. He then expanded requirements and I changed the program to suit. Overall not too hard, but I considered it a good phone screen (my previous employer started using CoderPad after I told them about this interview, it's a good tool). I liked that they had a well defined program with tests already done that I could run as much as I needed. It felt more like collaborative development then an interview. I interviewed in DC. This office is only a few years old, so most employees have been there 1-2 years or less. In person I interviewed for about four hours with five people--mostly one an one but with one section there were two people (both of which were more junior). The first two parts were technical and both again used CoderPad in person. The first had some sample code to start and asked me to implement an algorithm in JavaScript. It happened to be one I didn't know so he had to explain it to me. Once he did that it was fine. Again I had one problem while developing it and quickly debugged. When I was done he looked at it and said it was not like any solution he'd seen before and how does it work without "setTimeout"? I walked him through it in detail to explain my solution and I also asked how other people do it, which he explained. Again it felt more like a pair-programming session than an interview and I definitely felt like I'd enjoy working with the interviewer. Second interview was more a technical q&a, went through resume a little, also had a short CoderPad session, and asked a bunch of specific questions I don't remember right now. Third interview was with prospective boss, more typical management type interview (although he's not really a manager, more of a lead). Finally I talked to HR and she mostly just explained things about the company and office and we talked about some logistics and timing. One thing that threw me a bit was when I asked questions the company is very secretive about many aspects of their business. I had hoped to know more about exactly what type of work they do or who clients are, but in the end I felt satisfied that the people I interviewed with all seemed very good and I'd be happy working with them. I had an offer the next day. HR sent an e-mail answering some more questions that I didn't get answers to in-person and I accepted the offer the same day.

It was a pretty thorough process. initial phone screen, 2 phone interviews, then 4 in person interviews. Had 2 in one day, then another a week later, and finished up with an HR interview the following day. A week after that they asked me for references, and I got an offer a few days later. Total process took about 4 weeks. The phone interviews were basically trying to get an idea of what you know in terms of management and agile expertise, as well as financial services industry experience and knowledge. The first in person interview was with 2 Principal Agile Managers, and it was in some ways more of a discussion. Talked about agile understanding and philosophical approaches. Went through a scenario/case at a theoretical client and how I'd go about doing certain things. And depending on how I'd answer, different questions/discussion points would be brought up. If you are an experienced manager and know agile principles well (you don't have to be a coach level expert), this interview should not be too difficult. They don't try to trick you or stump you. It's not easy, it's just solid. They look for communication skills, how you'd handle yourself in front of a client, how you'd manage risks and difficult situations... you know, typical management skills. You can even disagree on a philosophical concept. So don't worry if that happens. They also ask more financial knowledge. You should have some, but don't need to be an expert. if you don't have industry experience but know a good bit about capital markets, and have an interest in finance, you should be good. If you don't know anything about the stock market, bonds, mortgages etc, then this would be a tough spot for you. After that initial in person interview, i got the impression that the next 2 were more of trying to get a feel for who you are and if you'd fit in with the culture. They were more relaxed and conversational. The final one was with HR, which I think is actually a good way to do it, because they ask you about the soft skills a manager needs - how you handle conflicts, or a poor performer, managing clients etc.