Google Software Engineer Interview Experience — Three-Part Hiring Assessment on Work Style and Ethics

These are the latest Google Hiring Assessment questions I had just finished. They were all questions I actually received.

This time I took the new version of the Google Hiring Assessment. There was no coding, and it mainly had three parts.

Part One: Most Like Me / Least Like Me

Each question gave three statements. First I chose the one most like me, and then I chose the one least like me from the remaining two. The most annoying part was that many questions listed three positive qualities, so it was not about deciding what was right or wrong. It was about ranking several work styles. The combinations we saw included:

• Colleagues from different backgrounds can broaden my perspective / I can adapt to new ways of working / I notify the team when a deadline changes
• I can keep a project moving when it is constantly changing / cross-team collaboration / using feedback to improve a presentation
• Considering multiple solutions / persisting through a difficult task / paying attention to wording when messaging a colleague
• Completing assigned tasks / verifying information before sharing it / learning from past experience
• A structured work routine / helping only when someone asks / pursuing perfection on the first attempt
• Weighing different solutions / clarifying the objective / fixing an error no matter how much extra time it takes
• Meeting a deadline without reminders / providing clear information / finding collaboration helpful
• Trying a new approach when the original solution does not work / explaining a project to different audiences / asking for feedback on deliverables

The profile we kept was fairly consistent: adaptable, structured in problem solving, dependable, and willing to take ownership, while also staying positive about collaboration and communication. The key was not to say at one point that I was extremely independent and then later make it sound as though I could do nothing without someone else's instructions.

Strongly Agree / Strongly Disagree

This part was more direct. It mostly covered adaptability, learning from mistakes, feedback, teamwork, resilience, and process improvement. Statements that were clearly positive generally went toward Agree, and clearly negative statements went toward Disagree, but I still paid attention to absolute words such as "only," "all," "completely," and "regardless."

The statements I actually saw included:

• I identify processes that may be wasting time or resources. -> Strongly Agree
• I take action to cut down on time wasted in processes. -> Strongly Agree
• I wait for all task details to be clear before starting. -> Strongly Disagree
• I smoothly transition between different work tasks or projects. -> Strongly Agree
• I revise my plans when new data emerges. -> Strongly Agree
• I quickly overcome failures at work. -> Strongly Agree
• I share my knowledge and expertise with teammates. -> Strongly Agree
• I cooperate with others to finish a task. -> Strongly Agree
• I provide constructive feedback to teammates. -> Strongly Agree

Part Three: Scenarios, choosing MOST / LEAST likely

This section leaned heavily toward ethics, confidentiality, policy, and conflicts of interest. The specific situations I encountered included:

• A client offers an expensive gift card, but company policy prohibits accepting gifts. Most likely: decline politely. Least likely: knowingly accept it despite the policy.
• A friend works for a competitor and asks for current client contact information. Most likely: state clearly that I cannot share it. Least likely: give the friend the client contacts.
• A system error assigns a colleague's sales credit to me, and that credit would let me hit my annual target. Most likely: report the error to my manager. Least likely: keep the credit because I did not cause the error.
• The annual sales goal is one sale short with two days before the deadline. Most likely: contact more potential clients. Least likely: offer an unauthorized discount.
• When a clear policy applies, the most likely response is to follow the policy and refuse.
• I have proposed many innovative ideas, but my manager has not prioritized them. Most likely: align with my manager on team priorities and explain how my idea supports the larger goal. Least likely: take the idea to a competitor.
• I am buying a software tool, a friend's startup is one of the vendors, and policy requires an objective evaluation. Most likely: have someone without that conflict make the decision. Least likely: buy it directly because the vendor belongs to my friend.
• In a crowded coffee shop, my manager wants to call and discuss a confidential project. Most likely: schedule another truly private time. Least likely: take the call because other people probably cannot hear clearly.
• Sensitive employee data may be handled only on a company device, but the software on my work laptop is broken and the deadline is tomorrow. Most likely: tell a senior leader that the technical issue will cause a delay. Least likely: email the complete data to my personal laptop.

My overall impression was that the first part required the most consistency, the second part was the most direct, and in the third part, whenever a clear company policy appeared, policy and integrity almost always took priority over a deadline, a relationship, or convenience.