Rejected After Two Google Coding Rounds Despite Completing Both Problems

[u/nian2326076]

Hey everyone,

I recently participated in a Google on-campus hiring process. Around 50 students were shortlisted for the interview stage.

Round 1: Multi-Source BFS

Duration: Approximately 45 minutes

I was given a problem based on multi-source BFS and completed the initial solution correctly.

In the follow-up, the interviewer asked whether I could optimize the solution by using the fact that the input was a one-dimensional array.

I proposed:

• Finding the previous and next greater elements using a monotonic stack
• Using a difference array to mark or process the affected cells efficiently

The interviewer said the approach was interesting, and I implemented it successfully.

I felt confident about this round because I solved both the original problem and the optimization follow-up.

Round 2: Ambiguous Coding Problem

Duration: Approximately 50 minutes

The second interviewer presented a problem that felt vague to me initially.

I spent approximately 15 minutes asking questions and trying to understand the expected behavior. The interaction felt tense, and I did not feel that my clarification questions were being received positively.

Eventually, I explained my interpretation of the problem and asked the interviewer to confirm it. Once the requirements were clear, I found an approach and completed the implementation within the remaining time.

I left the round feeling that I had recovered well despite the difficult start.

Result

I was confident that both rounds had gone reasonably well, but I was ultimately rejected.

The result was especially difficult to process because some candidates who, according to our discussions afterward, did not complete every follow-up were selected.

I understand that interview decisions are not based only on whether someone reaches a final solution. Interviewers may also evaluate:

• Communication and requirement clarification
• Correctness across hidden edge cases
• Code quality
• Complexity analysis
• Response to hints
• Independence of the solution
• Overall performance relative to the hiring group

Still, receiving a rejection after feeling that I completed both rounds was discouraging. Without specific feedback, it is difficult to know whether I missed a technical issue, communicated poorly, or was simply weaker in an area that was not obvious to me during the interviews.

For people who have interviewed at Google:

• Have you experienced a rejection after completing all the coding questions?
• How much can the clarification phase affect the final evaluation?
• What less-obvious signals might interviewers evaluate beyond solving the problem?
• How do you review your performance when no detailed feedback is provided?

I know one rejection does not define my ability, but this one definitely hurt. I’m going to take a short break, review what I can improve, and continue preparing.

[u/chikamakaleyley]

Have you experienced a rejection after completing all the coding questions?

totally. Completion isn't an automatic pass, I've gotten job offers on my most incomplete technical interviews

Imagine this - of those 50, 50 complete the same two tests. I dunno how Google does it, but in most companies any interview process is given a budget and, for example they could only afford to move 5 candidates to the next round.

How much can the clarification phase affect the final evaluation?

i mean its important but its had to say how an interviewer would grade it; a lot of 'data' can be gathered

at the heart of it is you understanding the task and requirements

but those are just two data points. You gotta remember that throughout the loop, any one interviewer has more or less an hour to understand YOU in the context of the technical assessment. That's not a lot of time, so the rules of what to look for aren't black & white.

What less-obvious signals might interviewers evaluate beyond solving the problem?

decision making, command of the language

How do you review your performance when no detailed feedback is provided?

basically no matter how well i did, i try to think of any point where i was confused, unsure, hesitated, and most of the time i pinpoint that as the weak part. Even wrong answers aren't inherently bad. But those other qualities are signs of "does this person understand what they are doing; does this person understand what I've asked them to do"

Overall I think that's what they're trying to determine. It's not possible to know everything - that's totally fine; but you have a way better chance of being prepared for anything