Arconic interview questions

Recruiter sent link to application referral. Different recruiter went over all my experience with me on the phone, job by job. Hiring manager gave high level description on a call, answered questions. Then in-person, things were very weird. Almost everyone everywhere seemed nice, but the team interviewing me noticeably looked at the wall a few feet away from me instead of at me. Then later one of the interviewing team’s members — who had barely interacted with me at all and through earplugs most of that time — randomly snapped and angrily intoned an off topic disparaging remark as we were walking. He seemed to think I was applying to be his manager, but this was for an individual contributor’s role on a team. Despite my technical background being the basis for the interview, I was not asked any deeper technical questions that come to mind to gauge the depth of my experience in my niche, and further some remarks were made in a third-round interview that misrepresented my prior experiences based on some hiring team bias from past experiences with other people, who nominally shared my career experiences and who were neither in the room nor representative of me. I can relate to having a bad experience at some point, but I spent this entire interview fighting their boogeymen. Then they requested references and changed their minds the same day without speaking to any of my references. Across six weeks, I got a picture that is hard to neatly summarize. I wish them the best, but with what I can’t really tell after all this.

I went through a three-round interview process, and overall, it was unnecessarily long and frustrating. 1. Initial Screening: The first round was a 30-minute phone screening with a recruiter, mainly focused on reviewing my background and checking alignment with the job description. 2. Technical Interview: The second round was with two team members, including the team lead. They asked about my technical skills and requested a high-level explanation of a mathematical problem. The discussion itself was reasonable. 3. Onsite Interview: The final round was an onsite interview that included a company tour and multiple sessions with different team members. I was also required to complete a fairly involved project that included coding, analysis, and presenting results. I spent around three full days working on this assignment—developing multiple solution approaches and preparing a presentation that was understandable for both technical and non-technical audiences. The expectations were high, and I delivered well beyond a basic solution. Major Issues: Extremely slow process: Each stage took at least 3 weeks to schedule or move forward. The entire process dragged on far longer than necessary. High effort, low respect: Candidates are expected to invest significant time (including travel and multi-day project work), yet the company does not match that effort in communication. No meaningful feedback: After completing all rounds and waiting weeks, I had to follow up myself—only to receive a generic rejection message with zero feedback. Overall: The interview process is demanding and time-consuming, but the lack of communication and feedback shows a clear lack of respect for candidates’ time and effort. If you expect candidates to invest days of work and travel, the minimum expectation should be timely updates and constructive feedback.