Interview Experience - 183 - Google | Software Engineer | L4
Summary
Job Role: Software Engineer (SWE III)
Number of Rounds: 4
Offer Status: Pending
Location: Not disclosed
Candidate Name: Not disclosing due to NDA
Interview Process
The interview process consisted of four rounds—three technical rounds and one cultural/behavioral round. Each round had a different focus, ranging from coding and data structures to problem-solving and Googlyness.
The timeline was structured in a typical Google style with a strong emphasis on writing clean, efficient code, followed by open-ended discussions about optimizations. The final discussion round was less technical and more focused on values and behavioral alignment.
Preparation Guide
There was no specific preparation source mentioned in the shared experience. However, based on the types of problems asked, preparation should ideally focus on:
Practicing medium to hard-level problems on LeetCode, especially involving arrays, sorting, and spatial reasoning.
Strengthening fundamentals in data structures and algorithms.
Working on optimization follow-ups, as interviewers often probe for efficiency beyond the first working solution.
Preparing structured examples for behavioral questions such as strengths, achievements, and conflict management with seniors.
Interview Rounds
Round 1: Coding Round
Duration: ~45 minutes
Difficulty Level: Medium
Experience:
The first round was a pure coding round. The specific problem statement was not directly shared, but a link was provided to a LeetCode discussion thread on Google onsite interviews. The candidate mentioned that the round was problem-solving focused, and the emphasis was not only on arriving at the correct solution but also on discussing trade-offs and potential optimizations.
Key Learnings:
Be prepared for open-ended questions where the interviewer might not just stop at a working solution but explore different approaches.
Keep communication clear and structured, as problem statements may sometimes be vague.
Round 2: Coding and Problem Solving
Duration: ~45 minutes
Difficulty Level: Medium
Experience:
The task involved designing a Calculation class with parameters a, b, and c, and implementing a function:
f(x) = ax^2 + bx + c
The requirement was to apply this function to all values in a given list.
After implementing the base version, a follow-up question was introduced: the interviewer wanted the output array to be sorted, and asked whether this could be done better than O(n log n).
This moved the discussion towards algorithmic optimizations, where the candidate had to reason about the mathematical properties of the quadratic function and how they could help in optimizing the sorting process.
Key Learnings:
Do not stop at a brute-force solution. Think about the mathematical properties of the problem and how they can be leveraged.
Interviewers often probe for complexity improvements, so being comfortable with time/space trade-offs is crucial.
Round 3: Algorithm and Data Structures
Duration: ~60 minutes
Difficulty Level: Hard
Experience:
This was one of the more challenging rounds. The candidate was given a board/floor of size a * b and m tiles of varying dimensions (e.g., 1x2, 1x4, 1x5). The task was to determine if a given arrangement of these tiles on the board was valid.
The rules of validity were strict:
All tiles must be placed either vertically or horizontally (no angled placements).
Tiles should not touch each other from edges or corners (no adjacency or overlap).
Tiles should not overlap.
The problem required implementing logic to validate whether the arrangement adhered to the above constraints. The discussion was open to assumptions regarding the input structure, but the correctness of logic was the key evaluation factor.
Key Learnings:
This problem required spatial reasoning and strong understanding of 2D constraints.
It’s important to handle validation problems systematically: break down the constraints and apply checks in an orderly manner.
Be ready for complex custom problem statements that test abstract reasoning in addition to coding skills.
Round 4: Googlyness
Duration: ~15 minutes
Difficulty Level: Easy
Experience:
The final round was focused on Googlyness and cultural fit. The interviewer asked short but deep questions, including:
A problem you are particularly proud of solving.
Your strengths and how they make you different.
Situations where you had to go against the opinion of seniors or managers, and how you handled it.
The discussion was conversational and aimed at understanding the candidate’s mindset, decision-making process, and ability to handle conflict in a professional setting.
Key Learnings:
Be ready with real, detailed examples from your past experiences.
Focus not just on what you did, but also on why you did it and the impact it created.
These rounds are less about correctness and more about values and behavior alignment.
Final Thoughts
The Google interview process, even at the L4 level, is designed to evaluate a candidate on problem-solving depth, optimization skills, and cultural alignment.
Key takeaways for future candidates:
Focus on medium-to-hard coding problems on platforms like LeetCode.
Practice follow-up optimizations—a working solution is just the starting point.
Build confidence in handling custom, abstract problem statements that may not directly resemble standard coding problems.
For behavioral rounds, prepare structured answers highlighting achievements, strengths, and conflict management.
Overall, the interview experience was balanced, challenging, and reflective of Google’s emphasis on both technical and cultural fit.