Interview Experience - 101 - PhonePe | Software Engineer | Software Engineer 2
Summary
📌 Job Role: Software Engineer
🔢 Number of Rounds: 5
📜 Offer Status: Offered
📍 Location: Bangalore
👤 Candidate Name: Not disclosing due to signed NDA
Interview Process
I was contacted by a hiring consultant via Instahyre for the Software Engineer 2 role at PhonePe. The entire process stretched across 3 months, which was considerably long for an interview cycle. Typically, PhonePe has 4 technical rounds, but in my case, it extended to 5 because one of the rounds didn’t go well and was repeated.
After the final round, I received a verbal offer within 2 days.
Preparation Guide
PhonePe interviews are very code-focused and expect candidates to write clean, modular code with proper naming conventions.
Interviewers were cooperative and helped when I was stuck or had difficulty recalling certain concepts.
The process was slow and could ideally have been wrapped up in a month.
A piece of advice: avoid sharing personal expectations during the interview process. Use other offers to negotiate and always talk in terms of Total Compensation (TC), not just base pay.
Interview Rounds
Round 1: Machine Coding
Duration: 120 Minutes
Difficulty Level: Medium
Experience:
This round was a machine coding exercise focused on designing an object-oriented service for a vehicle rental system. The session lasted 2 hours—15 minutes were allocated for discussing doubts and understanding requirements, while the remaining time was for implementation.
The interviewer expected an in-memory implementation with clearly defined modules. Additionally, I was supposed to write test cases to verify sample inputs. I managed to complete the core implementation, but I ran out of time before I could add test cases or properly modularize the code.
Problem Statement:
Design an object-oriented vehicle rental system.
Key Learnings:
Always factor in time for modularization and test cases during machine coding rounds.
Good naming conventions and logical separation of components are critical.
Round 2: Data Structures and Algorithms (DSA)
Duration: ~60 Minutes
Difficulty Level: Medium
Experience:
This round was a mix of theoretical and practical DSA questions. It began with an open-ended problem that, after some clarification, turned out to be an implementation of Minimum Spanning Tree (MST). The interviewer only asked for the approach and algorithm—no coding was required.
The second question involved stacks and was similar to the Next Greater Element problem. Here, I was required to write the complete code and the interviewer tested it with different inputs.
The third and final problem was graph-based, where I had to model the problem and apply a traversal algorithm. I struggled a bit with the modeling, but the interviewer gave me a helpful hint. I was able to finish the problem and also answer a follow-up that required a DFS traversal, though I only discussed the approach and complexities.
Problem Statements:
Implement MST (Minimum Spanning Tree) – approach only
Solve a problem similar to Next Greater Element using stack – approach + code + test
Graph modeling followed by DFS – approach + complexity
Key Learnings:
Practice a variety of DSA problems, especially involving graphs and stack-based problems.
Be prepared for interviewers asking for approach-only or full code depending on the question.
Round 3: System Design
Duration: ~60 Minutes
Difficulty Level: Medium
Experience:
This was a high-level system design round. The task was to design a Quora-like Q&A forum. I began with requirement gathering, followed by a high-level design that included components, services, and data flow.
We then discussed database design, debating between SQL and NoSQL based on use cases. The interviewer brought up capacity estimation, which I was unfamiliar with, but they guided me through it. We also discussed additional features such as search and feed generation, and how to approach implementing them.
Problem Statement:
Design a Quora-like Q&A forum
Key Learnings:
Understand and practice capacity estimation and back-of-the-envelope calculations.
Be prepared to justify tech choices (SQL vs NoSQL) and discuss various components like feeds and search indexing.
Round 4: Hiring Manager
Duration: ~45 Minutes
Difficulty Level: Medium
Experience:
This round was focused on behavioral assessment and culture fit. We started with introductions and then moved on to questions around:
Why I was leaving my current company
My expectations
Why I was interested in PhonePe
While the discussion was smooth, I had the sense that the hiring manager wasn’t fully convinced about my motivation for switching companies.
Questions Asked:
Why are you leaving your current company?
What are your expectations?
Why PhonePe?
Key Learnings:
Have a well-articulated reason for switching companies.
Make sure your answers align with the company’s values and mission.
Round 5: Machine Coding (Redo)
Duration: 120 Minutes
Difficulty Level: Medium
Experience:
This was a second machine coding round, replacing the earlier one. The task was to design a BookMyShow-like movie booking system.
I was better prepared this time. I completed the implementation, wrote test cases, and structured the code into Entity, Service, and Repository layers. The modular design and layered architecture were appreciated.
Problem Statement:
Design an object-oriented movie booking system like BookMyShow.
Key Learnings:
Structuring code into layered architecture helps in clarity and scalability.
Always include test cases and follow naming conventions to make the code production-grade.
Final Thoughts
PhonePe interviews are code-heavy, and a strong focus is placed on writing modular and testable code.
The DSA rounds were well-structured but leaned more toward problem-solving than implementation in some cases.
System Design required both theoretical understanding and practical trade-offs, especially with features like search and capacity planning.
Be well-prepared for behavioral questions, especially around your motivation for switching and what draws you to the company.
Use Total Compensation (TC) as your base unit during negotiations and avoid revealing any unnecessary personal expectations early in the process.
The process was overall positive, though slow-paced. Interviewers were supportive and helpful throughout.