I recently interviewed with Goodlord for a Software Engineer as a contractor. They planned to interview in 3 stages: 1. Interview with a Tech Lead 2. Take home exercise 3. Review on take home exercise ( or similar, didn't happen) The first interview with a Tech Lead was somewhat just an acquaintance with some very junior questions like the difference between encryption, hashing and salting a hash. Other questions included like Kanban cycles and wip which I find relatively unnecessary for engineers. It's just a way of doing development which most can comprehend even without having a single idea prior. Take home exercise required a single domain/business rule to be written as a service. This can be accomplished with a straight-forward service that honours SOLID principles. However, I wanted to deliver an app with Clean Architecture, Domain Driven Design and Command-Query Responsibility Segregation approach thinking that their business can heavily utilize these paradigms. I was apparently wrong. As per the feedback none of the Tech Leads approved because it lacked tests and didn't execute on single run. Although I pointed out that I didn't have time to spend on writing tests but given the loosely coupled architecture, classes would be easy to test by mocking dependencies. Instead I received a feedback as being "over-engineered". I am assuming they give less credit for such achitectured test cases. As a result, they cancelled the last interview with a shallow review without asking the approaches and the benefits of DDD, CQRS to their business.