The contact with the recruiter was friendly and professional throughout, and the technical interview was engaging and well-structured. Unfortunately, the rest of the process turned out to be one of the most disappointing interview experiences I’ve had. It was extremely long and poorly organized, involving six rounds in total and a full-day take-home assignment. The company pushed to complete everything within a month, which forced me to take time off from my current job. Overall, it felt less like a fair, two-way evaluation and more like a drawn-out test. Another major issue was the lack of transparency and consistency. The process began without specifying which team I was actually interviewing for — something that only became clear right before the final round. Despite receiving consistently positive feedback throughout, I was ultimately rejected in the final stage with the explanation that I had been “given multiple chances but couldn’t use them,” which I found both confusing and disrespectful. I never asked for multiple chances — this was supposed to be a mutual exploration of fit, not a one-sided performance test where they one-sidedly ask for your time (10-15 hours without any preperation time, just interviews). After investing six to seven weeks of effort and missing other opportunities due to the ongoing positive signals, the final outcome and communication left a very poor impression. The overall process suggested a company that undervalues candidates’ time and expertise — particularly on the managerial side — and treats interviews more like extended trials than genuine hiring conversations.

The process involved two stages: HR Screen (30 min): This was a standard and efficient introductory conversation. Hiring Manager(1 hour): Focused discussion on my technical background. The manager asked probing questions about past projects,