Real, anonymous reports from people who interviewed for Software Engineer at Rakuten Payment, newest first and distilled into what to expect across the loop.
The process started with a meeting that felt off from the first minutes. The interviewer was late by several minutes and didn’t really acknowledge it—no apology, no proper greeting—just started talking only when I asked something relevant. After that, the conversation didn’t naturally move into job scope or what the role would actually involve; it mostly stayed disconnected, and I only saw any “job-style” context when I prompted for it.
After applying, I waited about a week before getting a message inviting me to a programming test on HackerRank. The test was straightforward but still demanding: it included two programming problems where I had to pass the provided test cases to move forward.
The interview process typically follows a structured sequence starting with an HR screen, followed by coding assessments, technical interviews, and concluding with behavioral discussions. Candidates noted variability in the number of rounds and pacing, with some experiences feeling organized while others appeared chaotic.
Candidates faced a strong emphasis on coding skills, particularly through online assessments and live coding challenges featuring LeetCode-style problems. The technical rounds often included questions on data structures, algorithms, and system design, with a focus on optimizing solutions rather than just achieving correct results.
Behavioral interviews were common, focusing on candidates' past experiences and cultural fit within the team, especially in relation to Japanese work culture. Some candidates felt that the behavioral components were less rigorous than the technical ones, emphasizing communication and alignment over technical depth.
Interviewers sought a deep understanding of core computing concepts, including operating systems, cloud services, and specific domain knowledge relevant to the role, such as payments or Android development. Candidates noted that missing depth in these areas could overshadow overall performance.
The dynamics of the interviews varied significantly, with some candidates experiencing dismissive or rigid interviewers, while others found the atmosphere supportive. Communication style and the interviewer's approach played a crucial role in shaping the overall experience.
Many candidates expressed frustration over a lack of feedback and closure after the interview process, often feeling ghosted or left without clear reasons for their rejection. This lack of communication contributed to a negative impression of the overall candidate experience.