Real, anonymous reports from people who interviewed for Software Engineer at MICHELIN Connected Fleet, newest first and distilled into what to expect across the loop.
My first step was a recruiter agency-style meeting, and then I had what felt like a full day event on site with other candidates. The morning included an overview of the company and then group activities in the presence of psychologists, followed by an individual interview. After that, there was an offer step where the proposal contract was described.
Before going in person, I had to record a short video introducing myself. Once I arrived at Michelin, there was an interactive group exercise where I had to collaborate with other candidates to come up with a solution to a scenario. I worked alongside people studying both business and computer science, and then we presented our approach using poster paper, talking through what we had done.
The interview process typically begins with a recruiter call, followed by multiple technical interviews and an HR round, often culminating in an assessment day that may include group activities and individual interviews. Candidates noted that the process felt organized and structured, with clear communication throughout.
Technical interviews often cover a range of topics, including programming languages (Java, Spring), system design, and problem-solving scenarios, with a mix of straightforward and challenging questions. Candidates reported that the technical evaluations were designed to assess both knowledge and practical application under pressure.
The HR rounds often delve into the candidate's understanding of the company, its history, and their motivations, with a focus on cultural fit rather than just technical skills. Some candidates found these sessions to be more structured and fact-driven compared to technical interviews.
On-site assessment days can include group exercises, individual presentations, and various tests that evaluate both technical skills and interpersonal dynamics. Candidates noted that these sessions often required collaboration and communication, making them feel more comprehensive than traditional interviews.
The overall difficulty of the interview process is generally perceived as average, with candidates expressing that while the experience was challenging, it was also fair and well-paced. Many candidates reflected positively on the structured nature of the interviews, even if they did not receive an offer.
Candidates reported varying experiences with feedback and communication, with some noting prompt responses while others experienced delays or lack of closure after interviews. Clear communication throughout the process was appreciated, but some candidates felt frustrated by the final outcome and follow-up.