2021 Job Search Summary – Hoping to End

Foreword

I never imagined I could write this series for three consecutive years. Looking back on these three job changes, it felt less like job hunting and more like a search for myself, a constant oscillation between satisfaction and dissatisfaction. These three years also felt like a re-balancing process, repositioning and re-evaluating myself in the market—trying, discovering what I truly wanted, and striving to catch up with and balance my position in the market.

Although each of the three job changes had its own reasons, overall it was due to inner dissatisfaction and yearning. First, I jumped from a relatively comfortable company to a more challenging one, but unfortunately, after being mistreated, I returned to another comfortable company. After recovering and finding peace, I was awakened again by the cry from the depths of my heart.

It was these three years of job-hopping experience that allowed me to interview with most companies in the market and successfully collect offers from the top FAAMG companies (Facebook, Amazon, Apple, Microsoft, Google). However, due to various factors, I was unable to take any of them. It's best to apply to big companies early; the later you go, the more options and ideas you have, making it harder to choose them.

As the interview process progressed, I lost my initial excitement, and many things became repetitive. As a result, experience became especially important, so I decided to record these feelings.

Before we begin, let me share some of my previous posts, but I won't repeat what I've already shared.

• LeetCode Problem Solving Methods and Problem Types (Compilation)
• 2020 Job Search Summary
• 2019 Job-Hopping Experience Sharing – National Edition

100% pass rate

Unlike last year, I didn't interview with many companies this year. Compared to 31 companies last year, I only interviewed with 9 this year. Of those, only 5 were suitable and I made it to the onsite interview stage. And I got offers from all 5 of them. I only found out by looking back at my tracker. Of course, there was a lot of luck involved. I was pleasantly surprised and also thought about the reasons.

First, four out of the nine companies felt they weren't a good fit during the first round and ended the interviews, which eliminated some potential failures. Second, since they cared about the remaining five companies and focused on preparing for the interviews, they naturally had a higher chance of success.

Secondly, and as I often mention, onsite interviews place more emphasis on soft skills. If you can successfully pass the first and second rounds, the onsite interview will be less difficult, and your pass rate will naturally be higher. Let me reiterate my theory: if a recruiter doesn't contact you, it's because your resume isn't good enough; if you consistently fail the first round, it means you haven't practiced enough coding challenges; if you keep failing the onsite interview, you need to look for reasons outside of coding and your resume.

In addition, it is very important to position yourself in the market. Sometimes you can roughly know what kind of person they want and what kind of abilities they need before you even have an interview. This will make you feel very relaxed and at ease during the interview. Onsite interviews assess abilities, but they value whether the person is suitable to work with. If you have already learned about their work and business in advance and understand what they need you to do, it will be easy to start a conversation during the interview and you may even be able to lead the interviewer.

Finally, based on my experience over the past three years, the more experienced the position, the easier the interview becomes. This doesn't mean the content is simpler, but rather that it's more comprehensive, avoiding single-point failure. For example, previously, if you couldn't answer a question, you might fail immediately. But now, if you can offer a better alternative solution and provide a comparison, you won't fail; in fact, you might even get a bonus. This is why, as you progress, the emphasis and difficulty of coding challenges decrease. The more you know, the more flexible and adaptable you are, and the better you can apply your knowledge to different situations. Those who can explain trade-offs are more likely to pass the interview than those who only know one answer.

What impressed me most was this Apple interview. There were a total of 11 rounds, including 8 onsite interviews in one day. I was quite surprised when I heard about this arrangement, but upon reflection, it was quite good. Eight rounds of interviews would allow them to get a more comprehensive understanding of me and prevent me from being rejected due to a mistake in one interview.

Another major factor contributing to the 100% onsite pass rate this time is the hot market. The entire market has been reshuffling this year. Some companies have raised salaries, some have moved remotely, and employees who have been working from home for a year have had time to observe the market, which has given them the opportunity to move around, indirectly creating a market gap and making the entire market extremely hot. I think many people have felt this; my LinkedIn inbox is practically exploding.

If you want to work for a big company, you should do it as soon as possible.

First of all, this definition isn't entirely accurate, nor does it apply to everyone. It's true that the more experienced you are, the easier it is to get into big companies, especially in the later stages of your career (because you can be demoted). However, with experience comes more options, and if you have too many ideas like I do, you might easily miss out on big companies time and time again.

I recently saw an interesting post discussing why people leave their jobs. The general conclusions were: 1. The salary was too low; 2. The manager was incompetent; 3. There were no interesting projects; 4. There were no opportunities for promotion.

Compared to large companies, the salaries are roughly the same, so it shouldn't be the main reason. Although some smaller companies offer more than larger ones, the difference isn't outrageously large. Therefore, most reasons for leaving large companies are probably 2, 3, or 4. Why mention this? Actually, this is also an important factor to consider when choosing a company. When you receive an offer, what factors ultimately decide where you go? Of these three, only No. 2 is difficult to determine; the other two are relatively easy to understand through research.

As your career enters a stable phase, you'll increasingly feel the need to do something meaningful. Many things large companies offer can also be offered by smaller companies, so why not take the plunge and give it a try? Working at a smaller company allows you to experience interesting projects, increase your impact, and thus have more room for promotion, leading to self-actualization. Therefore, as you gain a better understanding of yourself, you'll become more inclined to realize your value. When you can only accept one offer, after careful consideration, a large company might not necessarily be the top choice.

Another influencing factor is level. Because large companies have many candidates, they often can't offer the level you want. Lowballing or demotions are common. Large companies generally have higher requirements for external recruitment than for internal promotion. If a smaller company offers more interesting projects, more room for growth, and the salary and level you want, then the attractiveness of large companies decreases.

Engineering Manager Interview

This was the first time I prepared for an engineering manager interview with a clear goal. Although the interview process was similar to that of engineering managers, the focus was different, and I learned a lot from the experience.

Manager and engineer are different jobs, and many people believe that manager is a necessary stepping stone for engineers. However, this is not the case. As a manager, you handle team and project matters daily, acting more like a supporter, and spending most of your time in meetings. Engineers, on the other hand, primarily focus on delivery, getting things done, and have more flexible hours. Therefore, the work-life balance (WB) for managers is actually much lower, which is why many engineers are unwilling to pursue a managerial career path.

Nowadays, engineering managers in the market generally need a technical background; it's rare to find candidates with purely management experience. This is likely a conclusion drawn from years of experience. As an engineer myself, I believe that managers who lack technical skills struggle to gain the trust of their team and demonstrate leadership. Therefore, engineering manager interviews are essentially similar to those for engineering positions, covering coding, system design, and behavioral questions. The difference lies in the emphasis. For companies, culture fit and leadership are crucial, so behavioral questions will cover a wide range of topics. The content I compiled during my preparation could probably fill a book. Preparing for each question is no less than going through LeetCode multiple times. Of course, coding is relatively easier in manager interviews.

Another crucial factor in manager interviews is bias. Hiring a manager significantly impacts the team, so the process is much more rigorous. It largely depends on whether the interviewer has a favorable impression of you. This intuitive feeling has a huge influence on the interview. Unlike engineers, where writing good code and answering questions often guarantees success, manager interviews frequently don't provide an immediate sense of whether you passed. You don't know if the interviewer likes you. While this isn't something that should be openly discussed, it certainly exists. Ultimately, it's all about fate.

Returning to China for employment?

I interviewed with several companies in China this year and received offers from most of them, but this also changed my mind about returning to China. I also wrote an article about this before:Some Thoughts on Recent Developments。

There are many factors that have deterred me from returning to China, but the post-pandemic work-from-home trend is a major one. I believe that more and more companies will offer fully remote roles, and in this case, I can earn a US salary and travel all over the world. If tax policy allows, I should be able to stay outside the US for three months each year (I haven't looked into it in detail yet), which is enough to meet my needs for returning to China.

Furthermore, China doesn't really need someone like me. I'm neither a top talent urgently needed by the country, nor the kind of person who can immediately bring visible profits to a company. The reason companies need me is mostly because they need a worker with overseas work experience. Every year, a large number of people have to return to China for various reasons, and these opportunities are prepared for them. Without the necessity of returning to China, domestic jobs aren't very attractive to me. Domestic companies don't lack capable people, and without mutual respect, reaching an agreement is impossible.

This is also a case of being born at the wrong time, right at the peak of this population boom. It's impossible to expect someone who's already full to appreciate a dish. Only when they're not having enough to eat will they cherish and choose each dish.

I suddenly remembered that I wrote a summary and rant about job hunting in China this year, but I never published it. I'm planning to split my blog soon; one part will be for friends with similar perspectives and won't be public, while the other part, suitable for the general public, will be completely public. After all, the online environment is getting increasingly toxic, and people from different backgrounds will understand things differently.