Real, anonymous reports from people who interviewed for QA Engineer at Intercontinental Exchange, newest first and distilled into what to expect across the loop.
My process at ICE felt intense in terms of time commitment and depth, even though I didn’t leave with a clear sense that it was tailored to what I’d already discussed. After an initial phone screen, I had a 45-minute interview with a QA manager. Then things escalated fast: I was pulled into a very long in-person session that ended up lasting around three hours and involved multiple people.
Recruiting kicked things off, and the process moved in stages: first a recruiter/agency phone round, then more technical conversations before I ever got to meet people in person. On the first call I dealt with pretty basic automation and QTP-style questions. After that, the next round was with the QA director, and it felt more like a real discussion about how automation was currently being done and what the team was looking for. I also had a later technical round with two people, where the questions bumped up to medium/high complexity on QTP and even included a few logic puzzles at the end.
The interview process typically consists of multiple stages, starting with phone screens followed by in-person interviews that can last several hours, often with multiple interviewers. Candidates should be prepared for a lengthy commitment, especially during the final in-person sessions.
Candidates can expect a strong focus on technical skills related to QA, including coding problems, SQL queries, and automation tools like Selenium. Some interviews may also include logic puzzles to assess problem-solving capabilities.
Interviews often include discussions about team dynamics, motivation, and work expectations, particularly regarding the candidate's fit within the company's culture and their willingness to work in-office. This aspect is crucial for understanding the company's values.
Candidates have reported mixed experiences regarding communication throughout the process, with some feeling a lack of clarity and feedback after interviews, which can lead to uncertainty about their standing. Clearer communication could enhance the candidate experience.
The overall atmosphere during interviews tends to be collaborative rather than adversarial, allowing candidates to engage in technical discussions without feeling pressured. This supportive environment can help candidates perform better.
Interviews often dive deeply into specific technical areas, such as test plan management and UI automation, with an emphasis on practical application rather than theoretical knowledge. Candidates should be ready to demonstrate their hands-on experience.