I've been in tech 15 years and done a lot of loops. GitHub's behavioral round stood out in a specific way that I want to call out for people prepping.
Most companies say they care about culture fit but end up asking the same generic STAR-format questions you'd hear anywhere. GitHub felt different. The behavioral questions were clearly tied to how they actually operate as a remote-first company. A lot of it came down to: how do you work when you're not in the same room as anyone?
Questions I got or heard about from others on the same loop (we compared notes after): "Tell me about a time you had to make a significant decision asynchronously, without being able to grab people for a quick meeting." "Describe a situation where you disagreed with a team direction. How did you raise it, and what happened?" "How do you create clarity for your team or stakeholders when the problem is still ambiguous?" "Tell me about a time you had to onboard yourself onto a complex existing codebase."
The thread connecting all of these: async communication, written clarity, and autonomous judgment. GitHub is famously async-heavy. They use GitHub issues and discussions for internal decision-making. If you can't show evidence of working well in that mode, you're going to struggle.
What seemed to land well in my answers: specifics. Not "I communicated clearly" but "I wrote a two-page internal doc, got async comments over three days, and we aligned without a single meeting." They're looking for proof you actually operate this way, not that you've read about it.
What I'd prepare: 3-4 stories about cross-functional influence without direct authority At least one story about writing something (a proposal, a design doc, an incident retrospective) that changed minds A story about receiving hard feedback and acting on it
It's behavioral prep, but specific to their operating model. Generic STAR stories won't cut it if they don't speak to async-first work.