Well, in my situation I was interviewing for two different positions, and the hiring manager presiding over one of them interviewed me for both. Mind you, the hiring manager didn't have a background in technical writing, so that always makes for a unique interview experience. First, you'll get an automated message telling you to take two online tests, for which you need a webcam so they can verify you're you. One is a personality test to make sure you're not a sociopath, and the next is a competency exam that has question formats like analogies, sequences, etc. If you aren't a good test-taker, you basically bomb out here. I was told by one of the company representatives that it's apparently difficult to pass this test, so perhaps they should reconsider their approach, since it's very similar to the approach used by Dish, which has a reputation for terrible employee experience. If they're happy with your test results, they'll do a phone interview. During the interview, I was asked to prove I could understand technology, something that's impossible to prove over the phone. There were very few questions about my background and ability to fulfill the job's requirements, and even when I did answer one, the hiring manager forgot my answer and had assumed I didn't have the experience I'd already described and that was also well-defined in my resume. If you make it through the in-person interview, they'll send you a writing assignment. The assignment asks you to rewrite a terribly written instructional paragraph, describe the difference between authentication and authorization and describe a scenario where you had to solve a technical problem and provide instructions for the solution. It took me only a couple hours, but they told me it would take between 4 and 18 hours. Either way, apparently it was good enough to warrant an in-person interview. When you show up for your interview, they'll parade you around the building to show off the modern, minimalist interior design and the "free snacks" in the break rooms. Then, they take you to the in-person interview, which for me consisted of the hiring manager as well as 5 members of his team. It seems the writing assignment carries very little weight, since the hiring manager and his team didn't even mention it in the interview (I asked about it later toward the end, and he said it must have been "good enough" since no one brought it up). Instead, they focused on questions like "how are you keeping up with best practices," "do you know what 'minimalism' is," "how do you get along with developers" and "do you prefer to work alone or in a team," none of which demonstrate my accomplishments or ability to excel in the role. The question "describe a time when you really needed to understand the technology behind the documentation" came up again, and again I made a vain effort to describe a solution I'd architected, but it was such a disappointing experience by then that I lost interest in working for the company and started botching answers just to get it over with. The interview ended 45 minutes early as a result. It's such a pity. It really sounded like a great place to work until I got there. They do a great job recruiting people into the building, but not such a good job keeping them there. I hope this description helps others who are considering working for Ping Identity!

# Impressions Throughout the interview process, everyone I interacted with at Ping Identity was friendly, respectful, and appreciative of my time. # Timeline August 20, 2018: Applied through the Ping Identity careers page. Received an automated confirmation message and a link to check my application status. August 21: Received a copy & paste email asking me to complete an automated cognitive and personality assessment. August 22: Completed the two assessments. August 26-27: Received a personalized email from an HR person inviting me for a 20-30 minute phone conversation. I explained that I had another offer on the table, so my time was short. She thanked me for my transparency. She skipped me past the usual HR screening and scheduled a chat between me and the hiring manager. August 29: Phone conversation with Director of Product Development. September 3: Submit writing assignment and two portfolio pieces. September 4: Phone call from Director of Product Development. Scheduled in-person interviews. September 7: Two back-to-back in-person interviews on site in Vancouver. September 10: Phone call from Director of Product Development with a job offer. September 11: Received job offer and police background check paperwork from HR. September 24: Started work. # Cognitive and personality assessment These assessments are imposed on Ping Identity by their parent company. They're not friendly, but they're effective. The tests are done through a website while another website records video through your webcam. The video is just to show that you're not getting help; they don't need to see your screen. The tests are generic: there isn't any direct connection to the role you apply for. There is no way to study for these tests, so just dive in. ## Cognitive assessment This is basically an IQ test. It gauges pattern recognition, logic, abstraction, and similar abilities. It's nearly impossible to complete all of the questions right in the time provided. If a question has got you stumped, choose a random answer and move on. There's no penalty for wrong answers, so it's better to get 80% correct on all of the questions than 100% correct on half the questions. ## Personality assessment The personality tests is a series of statements that you say do or don't describe you on a scale of 1-5. Just answer honestly. There is no time pressure for this assessment. # Phone interview This was a get-to-know-you conversation more than an interview. We talked about my work history and projects, but we also talked about our shared experiences of life overseas and learning foreign languages. Very relaxed and genuine. # Assignment To prove my abilities as a technical writer, Ping asked me to take the 80-page OAuth 2.0 publication and summarize it in a one-page Executive Summary. I spent about 10 hours on it. It was really interesting and I had a lot of fun. They seemed to really appreciate the time and effort I put in. I also turned in two pieces of my portfolio work: one technical procedure and one technical blog article. # In-person interviews I had two interviews at the Vancouver office. The first was with two people: the Director of Product Development and the technical writer at the Vancouver office. The atmosphere was very relaxed and unintimidating. They offered me water or pop from the fridge. Although the technical writer had a page of questions written down, the sessions was still very conversational and natural. I had plenty of opportunity to ask my own questions, share my thoughts, and bring up discussions that I thought were important. They also shared a lot of information about the company, where technical writing fit into the development team, and the challenges and frustrations they faced. I had a five minute break, then an interview with three people: two senior software quality engineers and a senior development engineer. They read their questions verbatim from their notes, but the session was still really friendly and conversational. Nobody asked canned "STAR"-type ("Tell me about a time when you..., what you did, and how it turned out") questions. There were no surprise or trick questions. Definitely one of the most pleasant and personable interview experiences I've had. At the end, the Director came back to thank me genuinely for all the time I'd put into their screening process. He asked for my salary expectations and told me when they'd get back to me.