As a Software Engineer at National Grid, you are at the intersection of critical infrastructure and digital transformation. You are not just writing code; you are building the software systems that monitor, optimize, and secure the energy networks powering millions of homes and businesses. Your work directly impacts the reliability of the grid, the integration of renewable energy sources, and the efficiency of our operational technology. The role involves significant scale and complexity. You will collaborate with multi-disciplinary teams—ranging from electrical engineers to data scientists—to solve real-world problems such as fault analysis, system stability, and smart grid management. It is a position of high strategic influence where your technical solutions contribute to the company’s mission of transitioning to a cleaner, more resilient energy future. Expect a role that demands both rigorous engineering standards and an innovative mindset to handle the unique challenges of the utility sector. 02 · Compensation
Online Assessment
reportedInitial assessment to gauge communication style, behavioral tendencies, and cognitive skills.
What to demonstrate
- Initial assessment to gauge communication style, behavioral tendencies, and cognitive skills
- Depth in Competency-based interviewing
How to prepare
- Answer aloud and timed: Describe a time you had to adapt to a challenging situation.
- Answer aloud and timed: How do you handle conflict within a team environment?
Recorded HireVue Interview
reportedCandidates complete a recorded interview to further assess their fit for the role.
What to demonstrate
- Candidates complete a recorded interview to further assess their fit for the role
- Depth in Competency-based interviewing
How to prepare
- Answer aloud and timed: Tell us about a time it was important to follow strict safety or procedural rules.
- Answer aloud and timed: What motivates you to work for National Grid specifically?
Live Interviews
reportedInvolves panel sessions with hiring managers and senior engineers.
What to demonstrate
- Involves panel sessions with hiring managers and senior engineers
- Depth in Competency-based interviewing
How to prepare
- Answer aloud and timed: Describe a time you built a strong working relationship with a colleague.
- Answer aloud and timed: Can you explain how you approach system design for a high-availability environment?
Assessment Center/Power Day
reportedFinal hurdle involving group case studies, technical deep dives, and competency-based discussions.
What to demonstrate
- Final hurdle involving group case studies, technical deep dives, and competency-based discussions
- Depth in Competency-based interviewing
How to prepare
- Answer aloud and timed: What is your experience with fault analysis or network stability?
- Answer aloud and timed: How do you handle debugging when the root cause is unclear?
PracHub editorial advice for the preparation topics above.
Prioritize the STAR Method
Always structure your behavioral answers using the Situation, Task, Action, Result framework. This keeps your answers concise and focused on your individual contributions.
Know the Core Values
Familiarize yourself with our mission statement and core values. If you can weave these into your answers, you will demonstrate a clear cultural fit.
Be Conversational
During panel interviews, treat the session as a professional discussion rather than an interrogation. We are looking for colleagues, not just test-takers.
Prepare Questions for Us
At the end of the interview, have insightful questions ready about the team’s current challenges or the company’s future energy initiatives. This shows high engagement.
Choose a category, try a prompt, then open its approach, worked solution or follow-up when you need it.
Collapse a redelivered event batch into per-aggregate high-water marks
You drain a batch of up to 5,000,000 events, each (aggregate_id BIGINT, aggregate_version INT, event_type, payload). The log guarantees order within one aggregate only; the batch merges 64 partitions, and a relay failover has redelivered a range, so an older version for an aggregate can appear after a newer one. Given a map of last_applied_version per aggregate, produce the events worth applying, at most one per (aggregate_id, version), plus the count discarded. Target O(n) time. State the memory for 2,000,000 distinct aggregates and what you do when it does not fit.
Approach
- One pass, one hash map from aggregate_id to the highest version kept, and a discard counter. An event whose version is at or below last_applied_version for its aggregate is dropped without further work, which is the whole reason the event carries its version rather than a delta. O(n) expected time, O(d) space in distinct aggregates.
- Keep the maximum, never the last occurrence. The redelivered range means the final appearance of an aggregate in the batch can be an older version than one seen earlier in the same batch, so last-wins applies stale state over newer state and the projection regresses with no error anywhere.
- Cost the memory instead of calling it large: an 8-byte key plus a 4-byte version is 12 bytes of payload, and an open-addressed table held at a 0.7 load factor costs roughly 17 bytes per entry before per-slot metadata, so 2,000,000 aggregates is tens of megabytes in a native layout and several times that in a runtime that boxes both key and value.
- If the distinct set exceeds memory, partition on hash(aggregate_id) mod P and reduce each partition independently. Every event for one aggregate hashes to the same partition, so the per-partition result is exact and the merge is concatenation rather than a second reduction.
Follow-up
- The payload is a patch rather than a snapshot, so applying only the highest version loses the intermediate changes. What changes in your reduction?
- How do you detect that version 7 arrived while version 6 was never delivered, and what should the consumer do about the gap?
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?
Diff a projection against the primary without per-row point reads
The listing projection has drifted and some rows show a stale version. The primary holds 40,000,000 resource rows across 12,000 tenants while serving 1,200 writes and 14,000 reads per second. The obvious repair, reading each resource row and comparing its version against the projection, is correct and would eventually finish. Explain precisely why it is unacceptable here, then give a diff that finds the differing rows, state its complexity, and make it safe to run against a live primary. Replication lag is usually under 100 ms and is not bounded.
Approach
- Quantify the naive cost rather than calling it slow: 40,000,000 point reads at even 0.5 ms each is over five hours serialised, and the only lever is concurrency, which is exactly what you cannot spend. The primary's pool is sized for the write path, and 40,000,000 random reads evict the buffer cache that sustains the 85 percent cache hit rate, so the audit degrades the system it is auditing.
- Replace random access with one ordered pass per side. Both sides can be read in (tenant_id, resource_id) order, which is a sequential scan on each and a merge join in O(n) time and O(1) memory. For a dense diff that is the whole answer, and it reads the primary once instead of 40,000,000 times.
- For the expected sparse case, compare range hashes instead of rows: partition the key space, compute per range an order-independent aggregate over hash(resource_id, version), compare aggregates, and descend only into ranges that differ. With d differing rows and branching factor B, at most d ranges mismatch per level, so the drill-down examines O(d log_B(n/d)) ranges and reads full rows only in mismatching leaves.
- Aggregate with a sum modulo 2^64 or a multiset hash, never XOR. XOR is order-independent but self-cancelling, so two rows wrong in the same way, or a row duplicated on one side, leave the range aggregate matching and the range is declared clean.
Follow-up
- The diff reports 900 stale rows. How do you decide between patching those rows and rebuilding the projection from resource_revision?
- Same job, but the projection lives in a search index that cannot be scanned in key order. What changes?
Hold a per-tenant active cap against concurrent creates
A tenant on the standard plan may hold at most 50 resources with status='active'. The create handler runs SELECT count(*) FROM resource WHERE tenant_id = $1 AND status = 'active', compares to 50, then inserts. Two creates arrive 3 ms apart on different instances and the tenant lands at 51. Name the anomaly, say whether PostgreSQL 16 READ COMMITTED or REPEATABLE READ prevents it and why, then give an implementation that holds the cap at READ COMMITTED with the exact statements. Finally, say what changes when the cap is 'at most one running export per tenant' on job_run.
Approach
- Name it: write skew. The two transactions read an overlapping set and write disjoint rows, so there is no row-level conflict for the engine to detect and each commit is individually legal.
- Rule out the levels precisely. READ COMMITTED takes a fresh snapshot per statement and takes no lock on the counted rows, so both see 49. PostgreSQL's REPEATABLE READ is snapshot isolation: it removes non-repeatable reads and phantoms within the snapshot but still admits write skew, because the anomaly is not a re-read of a changed row, it is a read of a set that a concurrent transaction invalidates. Only SERIALIZABLE closes it, by tracking the read dependency and aborting one transaction with SQLSTATE 40001 — a guarantee that exists only if the application re-runs the whole transaction from the read.
- Convert the set predicate into a single-row conflict: keep tenant.active_resource_count and run UPDATE tenant SET active_resource_count = active_resource_count + 1 WHERE tenant_id = $1 AND active_resource_count < 50 in the same transaction as the INSERT. Zero affected rows is the cap, returned as 409. The row lock serialises the decision at any isolation level, and contention is bounded to one tenant's row — which is also the fair-scheduling unit, unlike a global counter that would convoy every tenant behind one row.
- State the cost you just took on: a counter is a second source of truth that can drift, so every path that changes status must adjust it inside the same transaction, and a periodic reconciliation has to exist, with resource_revision as the authority for what the count should have been.
Follow-up
- A resource moves from archived back to active. Which statements change, and what breaks if the counter update and the status change land in different transactions?
- The cap becomes plan-dependent and a plan can change mid-month. Where does the number 50 live, and who reads it?
Denormalise tenant onto revisions and backfill it live
resource_revision (revision_id, resource_id, version, actor_user_id, change_kind, patch, request_id, created_at) has 400M rows and no tenant column; tenant_id lives only on resource. Two reads need it: a tenant-scoped audit feed ordered by created_at DESC, and an offboarding purge. Both join back to resource today. Justify adding tenant_id to resource_revision against those two reads, name the anomaly the copy introduces and the constraint that prevents it, then give the ordered migration for a live table taking 1.2k writes/second — the lock each step takes, how the backfill is batched, and where each step stops being reversible. PostgreSQL 16.
Approach
- Justify from the access path rather than from taste. Without the column, the audit feed either scans resource_revision by created_at and discards other tenants' rows, or resolves the tenant's resource_ids first and probes with them — both proportional to the tenant's whole history rather than to one page. With (tenant_id, created_at DESC, revision_id DESC) it is a seek that stops at 50 rows, and the purge becomes a ranged delete instead of a join.
- Name the cost exactly: a second copy of a fact can disagree with the first. Make the disagreement unwritable rather than documented — add UNIQUE (resource_id, tenant_id) on resource so it can serve as a foreign-key target, then FOREIGN KEY (resource_id, tenant_id) REFERENCES resource (resource_id, tenant_id) on the revision table. A revision can then only ever carry its parent's tenant.
- Step one, expand: ALTER TABLE resource_revision ADD COLUMN tenant_id BIGINT NULL, with no default, so it is a catalogue change and no rewrite. It still needs ACCESS EXCLUSIVE for an instant, and that instant queues behind the longest open transaction on the table while every later query queues behind it — set lock_timeout to 2s and retry rather than wait.
- Step two, dual-write: deploy the writer that populates tenant_id on every new revision while reads still use the join. Reversible by redeploying the previous build, because nothing reads the column yet.
Follow-up
- The backfill is half finished and a rollback is required. What state is the table in, and what does the previous build do with a half-populated column?
- How do you verify the backfill actually finished, given rows are still being inserted while it runs?
Can you explain how you approach system design for a high-availability environment?
Can you explain how you approach system design for a high-availability 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?
Explain a complex technical concept you recently worked on to someone without a technical background.
Explain a complex technical concept you recently worked on to someone without a technical background.
Approach
- Clarify what is being asked and what a complete answer contains.
- State your assumptions explicitly before working the problem.
- Say what you would check first and why it is the highest-information step.
- Work from the requirement backwards to the design.
Follow-up
- What assumption would you test first?
- How would you know your answer was wrong?
(For specific roles) Can you explain Ohm’s Law or the basics of parallel and series resistance?
(For specific roles) Can you explain Ohm’s Law or the basics of parallel and series resistance?
Approach
- Clarify what is being asked and what a complete answer contains.
- State your assumptions explicitly before working the problem.
- Say what you would check first and why it is the highest-information step.
- Work from the requirement backwards to the design.
Follow-up
- What assumption would you test first?
- How would you know your answer was wrong?
Given a set of renewable energy project proposals, how would you evaluate them based on cost, customer impact,
Given a set of renewable energy project proposals, how would you evaluate them based on cost, customer impact, and feasibility?
Approach
- Clarify what is being asked and what a complete answer contains.
- State your assumptions explicitly before working the problem.
- Say what you would check first and why it is the highest-information step.
- Work from the requirement backwards to the design.
Follow-up
- What assumption would you test first?
- How would you know your answer was wrong?
How would you prioritize power distribution in a town during a simulated emergency scenario?
How would you prioritize power distribution in a town during a simulated emergency scenario?
Approach
- Clarify what is being asked and what a complete answer contains.
- State your assumptions explicitly before working the problem.
- Say what you would check first and why it is the highest-information step.
- Work from the requirement backwards to the design.
Follow-up
- What assumption would you test first?
- How would you know your answer was wrong?
Walk us through your approach to a recent project: what were the constraints and how did you overcome them?
Walk us through your approach to a recent project: what were the constraints and how did you overcome them?
Approach
- Clarify what is being asked and what a complete answer contains.
- State your assumptions explicitly before working the problem.
- Say what you would check first and why it is the highest-information step.
- Work from the requirement backwards to the design.
Follow-up
- What assumption would you test first?
- How would you know your answer was wrong?
How do you handle debugging when the root cause is unclear?
How do you handle debugging when the root cause is unclear?
Approach
- Establish what changed and when, before forming any theory.
- Pick a bisection that eliminates candidates whichever way it turns out.
- Check the instrumentation before believing the symptom.
- Separate the trigger from the cause; the deploy is rarely the bug.
Follow-up
- What would you look at first, and what would it rule out?
- How would you tell a cause from a coincidence here?
Built from the rounds and topics National Grid candidates report.
Prepare, practise & reflect
One practical outcome each day. Spend longer where you need it.
0 / 7 done01Map the National Grid loop
- Write out the reported sequence: Online Assessment, Recorded HireVue Interview, Live Interviews, Assessment Center/Power Day.
- 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 Competency-based interviewing
- Spend the session on Competency-based interviewing, which National Grid candidates report being tested on.
- Write one worked example in Competency-based interviewing and time yourself on it.
Deliverable: One timed worked example in Competency-based interviewing.
03Work Presentation & Communication
- Spend the session on Presentation & Communication, which National Grid candidates report being tested on.
- Write one worked example in Presentation & Communication and time yourself on it.
Deliverable: One timed worked example in Presentation & Communication.
04Work Situational Judgment Testing (SJT)
- Spend the session on Situational Judgment Testing (SJT), which National Grid candidates report being tested on.
- Write one worked example in Situational Judgment Testing (SJT) and time yourself on it.
Deliverable: One timed worked example in Situational Judgment Testing (SJT).
05Answer out loud: Behavioral and Values-Based
- Answer aloud, timed: Describe a time you had to adapt to a challenging situation.
- Answer aloud, timed: How do you handle conflict within a team environment?
Deliverable: Spoken answers to 2 reported Behavioral and Values-Based question(s), under time.
06Answer out loud: Technical and Domain Knowledge
- Answer aloud, timed: Can you explain how you approach system design for a high-availability environment?
- Answer aloud, timed: What is your experience with fault analysis or network stability?
Deliverable: Spoken answers to 2 reported Technical and Domain Knowledge question(s), under time.
07Answer out loud: Problem-Solving and Case Studies
- Answer aloud, timed: Given a set of renewable energy project proposals, how would you evaluate them based on cost, customer impact, and feasibility?
- Answer aloud, timed: How would you prioritize power distribution in a town during a simulated emergency scenario?
Deliverable: Spoken answers to 2 reported Problem-Solving and Case Studies 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 adapt to a challenging situation.
Describe a time you had to adapt to a challenging situation.
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 handle conflict within a team environment?
How do you handle conflict within a team environment?
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 us about a time it was important to follow strict safety or procedural rules.
Tell us about a time it was important to follow strict safety or procedural rules.
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?
What motivates you to work for National Grid specifically?
What motivates you to work for National Grid specifically?
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 time you built a strong working relationship with a colleague.
Describe a time you built a strong working relationship with a colleague.
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?
What is your experience with fault analysis or network stability?
What is your experience with fault analysis or network stability?
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 adapt to a challenging situation.
- 02
How do you handle conflict within a team environment?
- 03
Tell us about a time it was important to follow strict safety or procedural rules.
- 04
What motivates you to work for National Grid specifically?
How long does the entire interview process take?
Timelines can vary, but generally, the process from application to a final decision can take several months. We appreciate your patience and suggest staying engaged with your recruiter for updates.
National Grid Software Engineer candidate reports ↗Are the technical questions always related to the role?
We strive to keep technical questions relevant to the position. However, some panels may ask broader engineering questions to test your fundamental knowledge of computer science and system stability.
National Grid Software Engineer candidate reports ↗How important are the "games" in the initial assessment?
These games are part of our holistic evaluation process. They are designed to test cognitive abilities like pattern recognition and numeracy, which are useful indicators of performance in complex engineering roles.
National Grid Software Engineer candidate reports ↗What differentiates successful candidates?
Successful candidates are those who can clearly link their technical skills to our core mission. They show a genuine interest in the energy sector and demonstrate a collaborative, "team-first" mindset throughout the assessment center.
National Grid Software Engineer candidate reports ↗What topics does National Grid test in interviews?
National Grid interviews most often cover Behavioral Interviewing, Problem Solving, Stakeholder Management, Data Analysis, and Case Study Analysis. The exact emphasis depends on the specific role you apply for.
National Grid 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.
- 01National Grid 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