This interview process is deeply flawed. I answered most of the questions correctly. Candidates are evaluated against a rigid system that only rewards answers matching predefined options, even for open-ended design questions where multiple valid approaches exist. Well-reasoned, constraint-driven answers are penalized if they don’t align with the tool’s expected wording or structure. This reduces complex problem-solving to keyword matching and completely misses how real engineering and design decisions are made. The final score did not reflect actual ability or reasoning. If this company is serious about hiring strong talent, this interview format needs a major rethink.

First interview was on the phone with HR. We talked about general information such as What did I do? Which programing language did I use? What is my salary expectation? etc. Second interview was on teams with software team leader. It took about 30-40 mins. We talked about general and specific questions.