6 rounds in total, which should have been enough of a red flag for me, but I think what they do sounds super interesting, so applied anyway. I do not understand the need for junior software engineering assesments for senior DS roles. I also didn't appreciate a part of the feedback, which claimed I miss DS fundamentals, which is an insane/arrogant thing to say to someone with a PhD and years of experience. In reality, I wasn't particularly well concentrated during the pair programming interview, because I found it weird to be examined in this way at this stage of my career. The initial conversation with Tom was nice, he is a very good first point of contact. The technical interview makes sense. The pair programming one and take at home software eng task does not make much sense for a senior or anyone really nowadays. There were also organisation issues, as the link sent to me for the pair programming interview didn't work, and when they finally sent the correct link, the interviewer seemed annoyed at me? Anyway, company sounds very interesting on paper, but they really need to rethink the interview process. It demonstrates nothing, as it is at the moment. Just wastes time of everyone who doesn't progress after multiple stages.

The initial conversation with the recruiter went well, but the overall process was quite slow with delayed communications. There is a significant mismatch between the senior-level job description, which requires strong leadership and architectural skills, and their actual assessment method. They use a standard entry-level coding test with strict time limits for all candidates, regardless of seniority. It doesn't feel like a mature process for evaluating experienced professionals.