I interviewed at Snap for a senior marketing role last quarter. The behavioral rounds were two 45-minute conversations and they were much more structured than I expected for a consumer tech company.
The recruiter told me upfront to prep around Snap's values, which at the time included things around speed, kindness, and creativity. But the actual questions in the interviews didn't name-drop the values. The interviewers just asked real behavioral questions and mapped your answers to the values themselves.
Questions I actually got: Tell me about a time you shipped something under significant time pressure. What did you cut, and how did you decide? Walk me through a situation where you had to disagree with your manager or a cross-functional partner. What happened? Describe a product decision where you had to use ambiguous or incomplete data. How did you frame your recommendation? Tell me about a time you had to rebuild trust with a stakeholder after something went wrong.
That last one caught me off guard a little. My STAR answer felt okay but the interviewer followed up asking specifically what I'd do differently. They wanted real reflection, not a polished spin.
For the creative question flavor: one interviewer asked me to describe a campaign or project I was proud of, and then asked how I'd change it if the budget were cut by 60%. That's a good proxy question. Know your work deeply enough to adapt it under constraints on the fly.
I noticed they do NOT want purely individual-contribution answers. Almost every question had a follow-up about how you brought others along or what the broader team outcome was.
I did not advance (they hired internally, per the recruiter's message). But I thought the process was professional and the behavioral rounds were genuinely well-designed. I've had worse from companies that should know better.