15+ yrs experience ignored for 3hrs of coding in Google Docs. Process: 15m screen, 30m behavioral, then TWO 90m coding gauntlets. Feedback was I "sounded nervous"—an absurd metric for senior talent. Instead of discussing architecture or leadership, they fixated on pedantic drills in a word processor. Natera values "coding athlete" performance over real-world delivery. If you don't enjoy live-coding without syntax highlighting, your decades of expertise won't matter here. Breakdown of Key Points included: * 15+ years experience: Established seniority immediately. * Google Docs: Highlighted the outdated tool. * Two 90m sessions: Emphasized the time waste. * "Sounded nervous": Exposed the flawed evaluation metric. * Pedantic drills vs. Architecture: Showed the mismatch in expectations.

1- 20 min phone screen with a recruiter 2- 45 minute Zoom with hiring manager My interview was with a relatively new hiring manager. Since this was for a senior role I expected more of a behavioral or project focused conversation. The first 15 minutes was small talk or personal questions (why did you stay at your first job so long, why did you move to the state you live in, etc) followed by a 5-min overview of the product the team was working on. I have 12+ years experience in this field but was only asked to share specifics from my current role even though previous roles were more relevant. Then the rest of the questions were about my current role. With 9 minutes left, the HM asked me to share my screen and solve a leetcode style coding exercise. The software with the exercise didn’t have a feature to run the code though. The HM also admitted the kind of exercise was not typically good to assess senior level engineers (so, why ask it then?) At 46 minutes they suggested we could stay on the zoom and continue to solve it but I wasn’t able to stay beyond the scheduled time. And because of that exercise I didn’t have time left to ask any questions about the actual role. 2 days later I received a no-reply generic rejection email.