I'd read the memo before the interview but not deeply enough to have a real opinion.
Show genuine engagement with the memo by highlighting specific values that resonate with you as an engineer, then offer a thoughtful, constructive critique that aligns with Netflix's culture of candor. Frame your suggested change as an enhancement that preserves the memo's core intent while addressing a real-world nuance.
Pro tip: Tie your critique to a concrete engineering scenario—like balancing 'Freedom & Responsibility' with the need for guardrails in high-stakes systems—to show you understand how culture translates into daily technical decisions.
Choose one or two values from the memo (e.g., 'Freedom & Responsibility' or 'Context, not Control') and explain why they resonate with your engineering experience.
Give a brief example of how that value plays out in software development, such as owning a service end-to-end or making decisions with minimal process.
Identify one aspect you would change, ensuring it's not a fundamental disagreement but a refinement that could make the culture more effective or inclusive.
Suggest a specific modification, like adding language about psychological safety or clarifying how 'adequate performance gets a generous severance' is communicated.
Conclude by reiterating your appreciation for the memo's boldness and how your suggested change would strengthen, not weaken, its principles.
AI-generated suggestions, not part of the candidate's original notes. May be inaccurate — verify before relying on them.