I had a disappointing interview experience with this company. The recruitment process involved two interview rounds before I was invited to a final face-to-face interview. The final stage lasted approximately 3–4 hours and included a presentation, a Q&A session, and discussions with around 10 interviewers. It required a significant investment of time and preparation. Although I appreciate the opportunity to meet the team, I was disappointed by the feedback I received after the interview. I was told that I lacked hands-on experience with a particular technology. This was surprising because my experience was clearly outlined on my CV and discussed openly throughout every stage of the interview process. If this specific technical experience was an essential requirement for the role, it should have been identified much earlier in the recruitment process. Advancing a candidate through multiple interview stages, including an extensive final panel interview, only to reject them for a requirement that was already known from the outset feels inefficient and disrespectful of the candidate’s time. I hope the company reviews its recruitment process to ensure that essential requirements are assessed earlier, providing a better experience for both candidates and interviewers

Extensive interviews with a case study, but the future evolution and communication clarity were lacking. The job description was incomplete, and additional technical responsibilities beyond my qualifications were unexpectedly introduced during the discussion. This sudden change understandably led me to not proceed further. Improved communication and transparency are crucial in interview processes to ensure alignment on expectations and responsibilities, and avoid time loss.