Teksystems Interview Questions (2026)
1 questions · 1p3a (1)
Top topics
TekSystems Online Assessment Algorithm Interview Experience
Question Details
Problem Statement
Goal: Minimize the number of "unhappy" students when assigning friend groups to a trip with a limited capacity.
Input: 1. groups: An array of length $n$, where each element represents a student's group ID. Students sharing the same ID belong to the same friend group. 2. t: An integer representing the maximum capacity of the trip.
Definitions: *
Friend Group Size: The number of students sharing the same group ID. *
Unhappy Student: A student is defined as unhappy if they are unable to go on the trip while other members of their friend group do go (i.e., the group is split). Students in groups where no one goes are not considered unhappy.
Objective: Select a subset of students to fill the trip capacity $t$ such that the total number of unhappy students is minimized. Ideally, you want to fit friend groups perfectly to avoid splitting them.
Examples: *
Example 1: * groups = [1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3] (Group sizes: ${2, 3, 2}$) * t = 4 * Optimal Approach: Taking Group 1 (size 2) and Group 3 (size 2) fills the capacity exactly ($2+2=4$). No group is split. * Note: If a Greedy approach is used (taking largest group of 3 first), 1 slot remains. Splitting the next group of 2 leaves 1 person behind, resulting in 1 unhappy student. *
Example 2: * groups = [1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4] (Group sizes: ${2, 3, 2, 1}$) * t = 3 * Result: 0 unhappy students (Taking Group 2 of size 3 fills the capacity perfectly). --- # Efficient Algorithmic Solution The Greedy approach (sorting by frequency and assigning) fails because this is a variation of the
Knapsack Problem or
Subset Sum Problem. A greedy strategy does not guarantee that the combination of groups sums exactly to $t$. ### Recommended Approach: Dynamic Programming (Subset Sum) To solve this efficiently, treat the group sizes as items with weights. We want to find a subset of these weights that sums to exactly $t$, or as close to $t$ as possible, to minimize the split.
Algorithm Steps: 1.
Frequency Map: Convert the input array groups into a list of group sizes. *
Input: [1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3] $\rightarrow$ Sizes: [2, 3, 2] 2.
Boolean DP (Reachability): Use a boolean array dp of size $t + 1$. dp[i] will be true if a capacity of i can be filled perfectly using whole groups. * Initialize dp[0] = true, all others false. * Iterate through each group size s. * Update the DP table: for j from t down to s, dp[j] = dp[j] OR dp[j - s]. 3.
Determine Minimum Unhappiness: *
Case A (Perfect Fit): Check dp[t]. If true, a subset of groups sums exactly to t. No groups need to be split.
Answer: 0. *
Case B (Split Required): If dp[t] is false, we cannot fill the trip with whole groups. We must fill the remaining space by splitting one group. * Iterate through all reachable capacities i (where dp[i] is true). * For each valid i, the remaining space is rem = t - i. * We need to find a remaining group of size G > rem to fill this gap. The number of unhappy students will be G - rem (the portion of the group left behind). * Minimize G - rem across all valid combinations.
Complexity: *
Time Complexity: $O(N \times t)$, where $N$ is the number of groups. *
Space Complexity: $O(t)$ for the DP array.
Topics
Related companies
Teksystems Interview Process Overview
The Teksystems interview process typically includes a recruiter screen, one to two technical phone screens, and a 4-6 round on-site or virtual on-site loop. Each round serves a distinct calibration purpose: coding rounds measure correctness, code quality, and complexity reasoning; system design rounds measure architectural judgment at the appropriate level; behavioral rounds measure ownership, leadership scope, and collaboration. Reports tagged on LeakCode from 2024-2026 show Teksystems runs a calibrated process consistent with industry norms for companies of its tier.
Difficulty calibration: Teksystems coding rounds typically run medium difficulty with follow-up depth as the senior discriminator. System design rounds expect production-grade trade-off articulation at L4+ levels. Behavioral rounds expect quantified outcomes ("reduced p99 latency from 800ms to 120ms") rather than vague impact claims. The candidates who advance consistently demonstrate clear thinking out loud rather than perfect final answers.
How To Use Teksystems Question Reports
Real candidate-reported interview questions are a calibration tool, not a memorization target. Teksystems updates its question pool every 2-4 months; memorizing exact problems risks misleading you when the interviewer uses a variant. The high-leverage approach: identify the patterns that appear repeatedly in Teksystems reports, practice those patterns on similar (not identical) problems, and use the reports to understand the interviewer's typical follow-up depth.
Filter the questions above by round type, difficulty, and recency. Focus first on reports from the past 6-12 months; older reports may reference questions that have since rotated out of Teksystems's pool. Reports tagged with quantified difficulty and explicit round type are higher-signal than reports without those tags. The metadata filters help you build a focused study plan in 1-2 hours rather than 8-10 hours of unstructured browsing.
Common Teksystems Interview Mistakes
Reports tagged "no hire" at Teksystems consistently surface a few patterns: jumping into code without clarifying requirements, coding silently for extended periods, missing edge cases (empty input, single element, large input, overflow), producing working code the candidate cannot refactor when probed, and behavioral stories that use "we" instead of "I" diluting individual signal. Strong candidates explicitly avoid these patterns by following a consistent round template.
The single most predictive failure mode in recent reports: not asking clarifying questions. Interviewers are explicitly trained to weight this dimension. Strong candidates ask 3-5 clarifying questions even on problems that look obvious; weak candidates dive into implementation immediately. Strong candidates also verbalize their approach before writing code; weak candidates code in silence and lose the communication dimension of the round's calibration.