> "but most of our interviewers are senior engineers at FAANG" Wait, so the result is that "interviewers from FAANG companies rate highly interviewees from FAA

> "but most of our interviewers are senior engineers at FAANG" Wait, so the result is that "interviewers from FAANG companies rate highly interviewees from FAANG (and FAANG-adjacent) companies"? Or maybe more causally: "those who have already passed FAANG-style interviews are more likely to pass interviews conducted by FAANG people"? I appreciate the mission here - but if the idea here is to give people a fair shot even if they don't have the pedigree of FAANG, building FAANG interview styles into the system seems counter to your stated goals. If anything these results are concerning - you can interpret the findings in (at least) two ways: - these companies hire or produce superior engineers, the results you got are indicative of a broader higher caliber of engineer in those companies. - the interviewing exercise is optimizing for "people who can pass/have already passed FAANG-style interviews", which rolls in all of the myriad biases of FAANG hiring and perpetuates them.