As a Software Engineer at Kendrit Consulting Group, you serve as a pivotal technical contributor within high-stakes, mission-critical environments. Our engineering roles—whether focused on Full Stack Java development or specialized Cloud Reporting and Documentation—are designed to deliver scalable, reliable solutions for our federal and enterprise clients. You will be at the intersection of modern cloud architecture and user-centric application design, ensuring that our technical output directly translates into operational transparency and business value. This position is inherently collaborative and requires a high degree of accountability. You will not only be responsible for architecting robust systems and maintaining complex cloud billing reconciliations, but you will also act as a bridge between technical implementation and stakeholder communication. Success here demands a balance of deep technical expertise and the organizational rigor required to thrive in a 5-day-a-week, onsite team environment. ##### Tip Because many of our projects support federal clients, you must be prepared to demonstrate not just your coding prowess, but your commitment to compliance, documentation standards, and reliable delivery in a clearance-sensitive environment.
Initial Technical Screening
reportedThe first step involves technical screenings to assess core technical skills.
What to demonstrate
- The first step involves technical screenings to assess core technical skills
- Depth in Java
How to prepare
- Answer aloud and timed: How do you handle microservice communication and state management in a distributed Java/Spring Boot environment?
- Answer aloud and timed: Can you describe your approach to reconciling discrepancies in multi-cloud billing (AWS, Azure, or GCP)?
Deeper-Dive Interviews
reportedThese interviews explore architectural decision-making and operational demands.
What to demonstrate
- These interviews explore architectural decision-making and operational demands
- Depth in Java
How to prepare
- Answer aloud and timed: What are the key considerations when deploying applications in an OpenShift or AWS environment to ensure high availability?
- Answer aloud and timed: How do you optimize REST API performance for high-traffic front-end applications?
Behavioral Assessment
reportedCandidates are evaluated on problem-solving skills and team contribution.
What to demonstrate
- Candidates are evaluated on problem-solving skills and team contribution
- Depth in Java
How to prepare
- Prepare three examples from your own work, each with a decision you made and an outcome you can quantify.
- Re-read the description of the behavioral assessment above and write down what you would ask to confirm before it.
Onsite Engagement
reportedAssessment of candidate's ability to engage with team members and stakeholders.
What to demonstrate
- Assessment of candidate's ability to engage with team members and stakeholders
- Depth in Java
How to prepare
- Answer aloud and timed: Describe a time you had to troubleshoot a performance bottleneck in a production application. What was your process?
- Answer aloud and timed: How do you prioritize tasks when faced with conflicting deadlines or recurring monthly reporting requirements?
PracHub editorial advice for the preparation topics above.
Structure your answers
Use the STAR method (Situation, Task, Action, Result) for behavioral questions to keep your responses concise and impactful.
Show your work
When solving a problem, talk through your thought process aloud. We value how you arrive at an answer as much as the answer itself.
Know our business
Understand that we are a consulting firm. Your technical work is always in service of a client’s goals, so emphasize how your work delivers value to the user or the business.
Be prepared to discuss your experience with documentation
In our environment, if a process isn't documented, it doesn't exist for the client.
Choose a category, try a prompt, then open its approach, worked solution or follow-up when you need it.
Archive a resource graph without breaking live references or recursing
Resources reference other resources within a tenant; for the largest tenant the reference table holds up to 2,000,000 nodes and 8,000,000 edges. Archiving a resource must archive everything reachable from it that nothing outside the set still references, refuse when a live external referrer exists, and terminate when references form cycles, which they legitimately do. Produce the archive order and the refusal list, targeting O(V+E). Say what stops the traversal crossing a tenant boundary, and why recursion is the wrong control structure at this size.
Approach
- Load the subgraph with the tenant predicate on both endpoints of the edge, not only on the side you started from. Scoping the left table alone is the classic cross-tenant leak: one mis-entered edge then pulls another tenant's resources into the traversal and, worse, into the archive.
- Traverse iteratively with an explicit stack. A 2,000,000-node graph can hold a chain deep enough to exhaust a native stack in the low tens of thousands of frames, and that failure is a process crash rather than an error you can return.
- Treat cycles as data rather than corruption: compute strongly connected components with Tarjan in O(V+E) using its own explicit stack, then condense. The condensation is a DAG, so a topological order over it gives the archive order, and every member of a component archives in one transaction because no order within a cycle is valid.
- Decide refusals with reverse edges. A candidate is archivable only if every in-edge originates inside the candidate set, so build the transpose or count in-degrees restricted to the visited set, and emit each blocked resource with the id of the external referrer, which is the only part of the answer an operator can act on.
Follow-up
- The graph is read in one query and the archive writes a minute later. What can change in between, and how do you make the write safe?
- The candidate set is 400,000 resources. Is that one transaction, and if not, what does a half-finished archive look like to a reader?
Find overlapping job attempts and peak concurrency from lease records
A day of job_run history yields about 50,000,000 attempt records: (job_run_id, job_type, attempt, started_at, finished_at which is NULL when the worker died, lease_expires_at). Leases expire on a clock, so a job that outran its lease ran twice. Produce (a) every job_run_id whose attempts overlapped in wall-clock time and (b) the peak number of simultaneously running attempts per job_type with the minute it occurred. Target O(n log n). State how you treat a NULL finished_at and what clock skew does to your answer.
Approach
- Define the interval before sorting anything: an attempt occupies [started_at, COALESCE(finished_at, lease_expires_at)). finished_at is observed and lease_expires_at is only a promise, so every attempt without a finish contributes an estimate and the whole result is a lower bound on overlap rather than an exact count.
- For peak concurrency, sweep: emit 2n endpoints, sort by (timestamp, kind) with ends ordered before starts at equal timestamps, then walk the sequence maintaining a counter per job_type and record each type's maximum with its timestamp. O(n log n) dominated by the sort, O(n) space, or O(1) extra if the sort is external and the walk streams.
- For overlap detection, do not compare attempts pairwise. A single global sort by (job_run_id, started_at) gives both the grouping and the order; within a group, keep the maximum end seen so far and report an overlap exactly when the next start is less than that running maximum, which is one linear pass after the sort.
- Half-open intervals matter and are easy to get wrong: with closed intervals an attempt ending at the same millisecond another begins reads as concurrency two, and across 50,000,000 records that artefact swamps the real signal.
Follow-up
- A handler is not idempotent and you have found 400 overlapping jobs. Which of them actually caused damage, and what would you query to find out?
- Peak concurrency for one job_type is 4 against a configured cap of 4. Is the cap working, or is the data hiding attempts that never started?
Track a rolling failure rate per destination for circuit decisions
The egress service delivers about 1,500 webhooks per second across roughly 40,000 destinations, each call bounded by a 10 second timeout. Maintain, per destination, the failure rate over the trailing 60 seconds so a caller can ask before dispatch whether the circuit should open. Attempts arrive as (destination_id, finished_at_ms, outcome). Requirement: amortised O(1) per attempt, with total memory bounded by the destination count rather than by traffic. Give the structure, its exact memory, and the rule that stops a destination with three attempts from opening a circuit.
Approach
- Name the exact-deque version and then reject it as the default. Holding timestamps and advancing a tail pointer past anything older than now minus 60 seconds is a correct two-pointer window at amortised O(1) per attempt, but its memory tracks in-window traffic, so one destination in a retry storm holds hundreds of thousands of entries while thousands of quiet destinations hold none.
- Use a ring of 60 one-second buckets per destination, each bucket a pair of counters for attempts and failures. On an attempt, advance the ring by the elapsed whole seconds, zeroing at most min(elapsed, 60) buckets, then increment the head. That is amortised O(1) with a fixed footprint per destination.
- State the footprint: 60 buckets times two 4-byte counters is 480 bytes of payload per destination, so 40,000 destinations is roughly 20 to 25 MB with per-entry overhead, bounded by the catalogue rather than by the rate. The cost is granularity, since the oldest bucket ages out in whole seconds, which is far tighter than the decision needs.
- Require a minimum sample before the circuit may open. A destination with three attempts and three failures reads as 100 percent and is not evidence; a floor of roughly 20 attempts in the window makes the ratio meaningful, and below that floor use a run of consecutive failures as the trigger instead.
Follow-up
- The fleet is 30 instances and each sees roughly a thirtieth of a destination's traffic. Where does the rate actually live, and what does a per-instance answer get wrong?
- A destination answers in 9.5 seconds and succeeds. It is not failing but it is consuming your per-destination concurrency. What signal should open the circuit here?
Find version gaps and relay lag with window functions
outbox_event holds event_id, aggregate_type, aggregate_id, aggregate_version, event_type, payload, status ('pending','published','dead'), attempts, created_at, published_at. A projection is missing rows and you must decide whether the relay skipped events or the consumer dropped them. Write three queries over the last seven days: one listing every aggregate_id whose published aggregate_version sequence has a hole, one giving per-day counts with a running total, and one returning the newest published event per aggregate. For each, say where the window function is evaluated relative to WHERE and LIMIT. PostgreSQL 16.
Approach
- Gaps: compute lead(aggregate_version) OVER (PARTITION BY aggregate_id ORDER BY aggregate_version) in a subquery, then filter next_version <> aggregate_version + 1 in the outer query. Window functions are evaluated after WHERE, GROUP BY and HAVING and before the outer ORDER BY and LIMIT, so the predicate cannot sit in the same WHERE clause and PostgreSQL 16 has no QUALIFY.
- Say what the seven-day filter does to the answer: it truncates every partition, so the first row per aggregate has no predecessor inside the window and a hole spanning the boundary is invisible. Widen the window, or join to resource.version as the authority for the true maximum.
- Running total: SELECT date_trunc('day', created_at) AS d, count() AS n, sum(count()) OVER (ORDER BY date_trunc('day', created_at) ROWS UNBOUNDED PRECEDING). An aggregate inside a window call is legal because grouping runs before windowing. The grouping key is unique per row here so ROWS and RANGE agree, but write the frame anyway — over ungrouped rows with tied timestamps the default RANGE frame pulls in every peer row and the total jumps.
- Newest per aggregate: DISTINCT ON (aggregate_id) ... ORDER BY aggregate_id, aggregate_version DESC is the cheap PostgreSQL-only form when an index matches that order; row_number() OVER (PARTITION BY aggregate_id ORDER BY aggregate_version DESC) = 1 is the portable form and needs a subquery for the same evaluation-order reason as the gap query.
Follow-up
- Relay failover redelivers events. Does a duplicate break the gap query, and how would you detect one from this table alone?
- Turn the gap check into a continuous monitor rather than a query someone runs after an incident. What does it watch?
Stop tag and share joins from fanning out a page
resource_tag is (resource_id, tag_id) with PK (resource_id, tag_id); resource_share is (resource_id, shared_with_user_id, permission). The tagged-and-shared listing inner-joins resource to both, filters tenant_id, tag_id = ANY($2) and shared_with_user_id = $3, orders by updated_at DESC and takes 50. Pages come back with fewer than 50 distinct resources and the total in the header is far too high. Explain the row multiplication, rewrite both the page query and the count query so each is correct, and name the index each one needs. PostgreSQL 16.
Approach
- Do the arithmetic against the predicates that are actually there. An inner join emits one row per matching child row, and both joins are filtered: tag_id = ANY($2) admits only the requested tags, shared_with_user_id = $3 admits one user's share rows. So a resource holding three of the requested tags and shared with $3 once yields three rows, not one — the multiplier is its count of matching tags times its share rows for that single user, and that second factor is 1 unless the table admits duplicate (resource_id, shared_with_user_id) pairs. LIMIT 50 then limits rows rather than resources, and COUNT(*) counts pairs — the header is the product, not the population.
- Reject DISTINCT as the fix. It deduplicates after the product has been built, so the planner must materialise and sort the fanned-out set before the LIMIT can apply, and it leaves any SUM or AVG in the same select list wrong.
- Rewrite both filters as semi-joins, keeping resource as the only row source: AND EXISTS (SELECT 1 FROM resource_tag rt WHERE rt.resource_id = r.resource_id AND rt.tag_id = ANY($2)) and the same shape against resource_share. A semi-join stops at the first match per resource and preserves the driving index order, so ORDER BY updated_at DESC, resource_id DESC LIMIT 50 still stops after 50 rows.
- Count with the same predicates and no join at all: SELECT count(*) FROM resource r WHERE r.tenant_id = $1 AND r.status = 'active' AND EXISTS (...) AND EXISTS (...). Nothing multiplies a resource, so the number is the population.
Follow-up
- The filter changes from 'any of these tags' to 'all of these tags'. Rewrite it and state what it costs relative to the ANY form.
- A resource can be shared with the same user twice under different permissions. Does your count change, and should it?
How do you handle microservice communication and state management in a distributed Java/Spring Boot environmen
How do you handle microservice communication and state management in a distributed Java/Spring Boot environment?
Approach
- Fix the scope first: who calls this, how often, and what they do when it fails.
- Name the read and write paths separately; they rarely have the same bottleneck.
- Choose a partition key and say what query it makes expensive.
- State the consistency you need, and where you are willing to be stale.
Follow-up
- What breaks first when traffic grows ten times?
- How does this behave when that dependency is down for an hour?
Can you describe your approach to reconciling discrepancies in multi-cloud billing (AWS, Azure, or GCP)?
Can you describe your approach to reconciling discrepancies in multi-cloud billing (AWS, Azure, or GCP)?
Approach
- Fix the scope first: who calls this, how often, and what they do when it fails.
- Name the read and write paths separately; they rarely have the same bottleneck.
- Choose a partition key and say what query it makes expensive.
- State the consistency you need, and where you are willing to be stale.
Follow-up
- What breaks first when traffic grows ten times?
- How does this behave when that dependency is down for an hour?
What are the key considerations when deploying applications in an OpenShift or AWS environment to ensure high
What are the key considerations when deploying applications in an OpenShift or AWS environment to ensure high availability?
Approach
- Fix the scope first: who calls this, how often, and what they do when it fails.
- Name the read and write paths separately; they rarely have the same bottleneck.
- Choose a partition key and say what query it makes expensive.
- State the consistency you need, and where you are willing to be stale.
Follow-up
- What breaks first when traffic grows ten times?
- How does this behave when that dependency is down for an hour?
How do you optimize REST API performance for high-traffic front-end applications?
How do you optimize REST API performance for high-traffic front-end applications?
Approach
- Say who the caller is and what they do when the call fails halfway.
- Define the identity of a request so a retry cannot double-apply it.
- Separate accepted, pending, failed and confirmed; they are different facts.
- Design the error taxonomy before the success shape; callers branch on it.
Follow-up
- What happens if the caller retries after a timeout?
- How does a client discover it is on an old version of this contract?
Walk me through how you would design a dashboard to track and report on cloud usage trends for non-technical s
Walk me through how you would design a dashboard to track and report on cloud usage trends for non-technical stakeholders.
Approach
- Fix the scope first: who calls this, how often, and what they do when it fails.
- Name the read and write paths separately; they rarely have the same bottleneck.
- Choose a partition key and say what query it makes expensive.
- State the consistency you need, and where you are willing to be stale.
Follow-up
- What breaks first when traffic grows ten times?
- How does this behave when that dependency is down for an hour?
How do you identify and mitigate cost anomalies within a large-scale cloud infrastructure?
How do you identify and mitigate cost anomalies within a large-scale cloud infrastructure?
Approach
- Fix the scope first: who calls this, how often, and what they do when it fails.
- Name the read and write paths separately; they rarely have the same bottleneck.
- Choose a partition key and say what query it makes expensive.
- State the consistency you need, and where you are willing to be stale.
Follow-up
- What breaks first when traffic grows ten times?
- How does this behave when that dependency is down for an hour?
One customer endpoint stalls deliveries to every other destination
The egress service delivers about 1.5k webhooks/second across 40,000 destinations, with a per-destination concurrency cap of 4 and a 10-second connect-plus-read timeout. Throughput falls to 300/second, queue depth climbs, and p99 delivery latency for unaffected destinations goes from 200 ms to minutes, while the error rate barely moves. One tenant holds 900 destination rows whose URLs share a hostname that now answers in 9.5 seconds. Explain the mechanism with the arithmetic, then give the containment in the order you would apply it.
Approach
- Look at saturation before errors. A flat error rate with collapsing throughput says nothing is failing, things are waiting, so the first signal to pull is in-flight request count or pool wait time rather than the error counter. This is the distinction that decides the whole investigation.
- Group in-flight work by resolved host, not by destination id. The cap is keyed per destination row, so 900 rows sharing one hostname buy 3,600 concurrent slots against a single host, each held for 9.5 seconds. The bulkhead was never a bulkhead for that host, and grouping by the wrong dimension is why the dashboard looked healthy.
- Do the arithmetic in both directions. Required concurrency is arrival rate times latency, so 1.5k/second at 200 ms needs about 300 in flight, which is entirely consumed by 3,600 slow slots; conversely whatever concurrency is left sustains rate equals concurrency divided by 9.5 seconds, which is the 300/second you are seeing. Matching both numbers is what promotes this from a plausible story to the mechanism.
- Explain why the circuit breaker never helped. It opens on consecutive failures, and a 9.5-second response inside a 10-second timeout is a success. Slow is not failing, so an error-rate breaker cannot see this; you need a slow-call ratio, a deadline propagated from the caller's remaining budget, or a concurrency limiter.
Follow-up
- The host recovers to 80 ms. How long does the queue take to drain, and what does the drain do to the recovered host?
- Where should the 10-second timeout number actually come from?
Built from the rounds and topics Kendrit Consulting Group candidates report.
Prepare, practise & reflect
One practical outcome each day. Spend longer where you need it.
0 / 7 done01Map the Kendrit Consulting Group loop
- Write out the reported sequence: Initial Technical Screening, Deeper-Dive Interviews, Behavioral Assessment, Onsite Engagement.
- For each round, write one sentence on what it is judging, from the description above, and mark the one you are least ready for.
Deliverable: A one-page map of the 4 reported rounds, with the weakest marked.
02Work Java
- Spend the session on Java, which Kendrit Consulting Group candidates report being tested on.
- Write one worked example in Java and time yourself on it.
Deliverable: One timed worked example in Java.
03Work Spring Boot
- Spend the session on Spring Boot, which Kendrit Consulting Group candidates report being tested on.
- Write one worked example in Spring Boot and time yourself on it.
Deliverable: One timed worked example in Spring Boot.
04Work Microservices Architecture
- Spend the session on Microservices Architecture, which Kendrit Consulting Group candidates report being tested on.
- Write one worked example in Microservices Architecture and time yourself on it.
Deliverable: One timed worked example in Microservices Architecture.
05Answer out loud: Technical Proficiency and Cloud Architecture
- Answer aloud, timed: How do you handle microservice communication and state management in a distributed Java/Spring Boot environment?
- Answer aloud, timed: Can you describe your approach to reconciling discrepancies in multi-cloud billing (AWS, Azure, or GCP)?
Deliverable: Spoken answers to 2 reported Technical Proficiency and Cloud Architecture question(s), under time.
06Answer out loud: System Design and Problem Solving
- Answer aloud, timed: Walk me through how you would design a dashboard to track and report on cloud usage trends for non-technical stakeholders.
- Answer aloud, timed: How do you identify and mitigate cost anomalies within a large-scale cloud infrastructure?
Deliverable: Spoken answers to 2 reported System Design and Problem Solving question(s), under time.
07Answer out loud: Behavioral and Professional Alignment
- Answer aloud, timed: How do you prioritize tasks when faced with conflicting deadlines or recurring monthly reporting requirements?
- Answer aloud, timed: Describe a situation where you had to explain a complex technical issue to a non-technical stakeholder.
Deliverable: Spoken answers to 2 reported Behavioral and Professional Alignment question(s), under time.
Expand any day for tasks and deliverables. Your progress is saved on this device.
Behavioural rounds judge the decision you made and what it cost.
Describe a time you had to troubleshoot a performance bottleneck in a production application. What was your pr
Describe a time you had to troubleshoot a performance bottleneck in a production application. What was your process?
Approach
- Pick a story where you made the decision, not one where you watched it.
- State the situation in two sentences and spend the rest on the reasoning.
- Give the blast radius: what could have broken, and what you measured.
- Name the disagreement and how you resolved it with evidence.
Follow-up
- What would you do differently if you ran that again?
- How did you know your change caused the improvement?
How do you prioritize tasks when faced with conflicting deadlines or recurring monthly reporting requirements?
How do you prioritize tasks when faced with conflicting deadlines or recurring monthly reporting requirements?
Approach
- Pick a story where you made the decision, not one where you watched it.
- State the situation in two sentences and spend the rest on the reasoning.
- Give the blast radius: what could have broken, and what you measured.
- Name the disagreement and how you resolved it with evidence.
Follow-up
- What would you do differently if you ran that again?
- How did you know your change caused the improvement?
Describe a situation where you had to explain a complex technical issue to a non-technical stakeholder.
Describe a situation where you had to explain a complex technical issue to a non-technical stakeholder.
Approach
- Pick a story where you made the decision, not one where you watched it.
- State the situation in two sentences and spend the rest on the reasoning.
- Give the blast radius: what could have broken, and what you measured.
- Name the disagreement and how you resolved it with evidence.
Follow-up
- What would you do differently if you ran that again?
- How did you know your change caused the improvement?
Tell me about a time you mentored a junior developer or improved a team's documentation process.
Tell me about a time you mentored a junior developer or improved a team's documentation process.
Approach
- Pick a story where you made the decision, not one where you watched it.
- State the situation in two sentences and spend the rest on the reasoning.
- Give the blast radius: what could have broken, and what you measured.
- Name the disagreement and how you resolved it with evidence.
Follow-up
- What would you do differently if you ran that again?
- How did you know your change caused the improvement?
- 01
Describe a time you had to troubleshoot a performance bottleneck in a production application. What was your process?
- 02
How do you prioritize tasks when faced with conflicting deadlines or recurring monthly reporting requirements?
- 03
Describe a situation where you had to explain a complex technical issue to a non-technical stakeholder.
- 04
Tell me about a time you mentored a junior developer or improved a team's documentation process.
How long does the typical hiring process take?
While timelines vary by team, most candidates progress through the rounds within a few weeks. We prioritize efficiency to respect your time, but we are thorough in our evaluation.
Kendrit Consulting Group Software Engineer candidate reports ↗What is the most important factor for success in these interviews?
Beyond technical competence, we look for "consulting maturity." This means the ability to take ownership of a problem, communicate your findings clearly, and work effectively within a team to reach a solution.
Kendrit Consulting Group Software Engineer candidate reports ↗Is the Public Trust clearance required before I start?
You must be able to obtain and maintain the clearance, but you do not necessarily need to have it active on day one. We will guide you through the requirements for your specific role.
Kendrit Consulting Group Software Engineer candidate reports ↗How can I best prepare for the technical portions?
Focus on your past projects. Be prepared to explain the "why" behind your technical decisions, the challenges you faced, and how you overcame them.
Kendrit Consulting Group Software Engineer candidate reports ↗What topics does Kendrit Consulting Group test in interviews?
Kendrit Consulting Group interviews most often cover Java, Spring Boot, Microservices Architecture, AWS (Amazon Web Services), and REST APIs. The exact emphasis depends on the specific role you apply for.
Kendrit Consulting Group Software Engineer candidate reports ↗Sources & methodology 3 sources ↗
No official company page is cited. Rounds and questions come from candidate reports and PracHub editorial material; each source shows the date it was read.
- 01Kendrit Consulting Group Software Engineer candidate reports ↗
Company-reported rounds, questions and FAQ.
Candidate reports · Accessed 2026-09-22 - 02PracHub Software Engineer practice ↗
PracHub practice material, not company-reported.
PracHub page · Accessed 2026-09-22 - 03PracHub preparation framework ↗
PracHub preparation guidance.
PracHub page · Accessed 2026-09-22
Explore related engineering environments and compare the preparation focus.
WorldWide Technology Holding Software Engineer Interview Guide
What WorldWide Technology Holding asks Software Engineer candidates, from reported rounds and questions.
XYZ Software Engineer Interview Guide
What XYZ asks Software Engineer candidates, from reported rounds and questions.
Walgreens Boots Alliance Software Engineer Interview Guide
What Walgreens Boots Alliance asks Software Engineer candidates, from reported rounds and questions.
The Federal National Mortgage Association - Fannie Mae Software Engineer Interview Guide
What The Federal National Mortgage Association - Fannie Mae asks Software Engineer candidates, from reported rounds and questions.