Contacted by a recruiter after a former co-worker from another company that is now in Google recommended me. First screening interview was on site since I live close to Google's offices in Tel-Aviv. Small algorithm/data-structure question with coding in C++ and a bit of STL. The interviewer was not very nice, snobish and condescending, yet I passed without any issues and was invited to a full on-site interviews day at a later date. The on-site interviews included 3 interviews focusing on algorithm/data-structures including a bit of coding. Nothing very difficult, but requiring good knowledge of topics like trees/lists traversal, dynamic programming, binary search, etc. One interview was on C++ knowledge, basic stuff like virtual functions, multiple inheritance, etc. with a small algorithm and coding question. Last interview was a design interview - design an image sharing system in which users can upload images, then get a short URL unique for their image and use it in forum messages, social networks posts, emails, etc. I was told by the recruiter that the feedback was mixed but with enough support for passing to the hiring committee. Then I was rejected and told by recruiter that the design interview is the cause. I find this decision very wrong, considering what I accomplished in my career and am sure 100% that any former colleague of mine would testify very positively on my design skills, but think back on the design interview I'm not surprised: The interviewer gave me a pen and papers so I could draw and write my design, but as soon as he finished asking the question he picked a pen and paper and started solving it himself, he seemed to be in a hurry to reach exactly the solution that he expects. He was not nice, arrogant and unpleasant to talk to and have an open discussion. In total 3 of the 6 interviewers were not people I would like to work with, while the other 3 were very nice and were fun to talk to and think together. I wasn't asked even once on my work experience or any of my past projects, no single "behavior" question like "describe a scenario in which you had a conflict", etc. and wasn't asked why I would like to join Google or what I'm looking for in a work place. It seems the entire process revolves around solving technical questions and nothing beyond that, so it's not surprising to me that 3 of 6 interviewers (in my opinion of course) had such bad people skills. I constantly had the feeling that the interviewers (all of them) prefer meek and inexperienced candidates, that can be shaped and trained to think exactly like them and would not show independent or out-of-the-box thinking. *** It actually felt to me like my experience and knowledge is an obstacle or a disadvantage instead of an asset that the company would and should appreciate !!! *** Other than that - I enjoyed solving the questions, food was great (and the engineer that escorted me was very nice and friendly, we had interesting discussions), the offices look and feel great. The recruiter was super friendly, always kept me informed and did his best to speed up the process, I have only good words to say about him. I later passed successfully interviews in other companies (including Google's competitors), some of which were more difficult, and received excellent offers from great work places, and I definitely think the process in Google leads to bad decisions. I was offered by the recruiter to try again in 12 months, but I have no such intention, nor would I recommend it to talented people that I know.