The process consisted of a two video interview (one HR and another technical) followed by a 3-hour onsite panel interview (3 separate panels) involving multiple rounds with technical and other stakeholders. Prior to the panel, I was asked to complete a very detailed take-home assignment (two tasks), which required extensive effort (over 5 hours), covering both system design and motion path programming. The onsite interviews were broken into three segments. 1. Presentation of the test assignment to system design technical panel, with extensive discussions on minor assumptions. 2. Technical discussion with software design technical panel on motion planning. 3. A technical discussion with broader team members. The team seemed intelligent and passionate about their product, the work is interesting (AR optics), but I think they lacked a bit on the practical approach towards upscaling the product (still too research oriented). I cannot say anything about the manufacturing facilities as I was not shown around. Some observations: 1. The pre-panel test demanded detailed concept design, 3D CAD, precision engineering planning, and custom motion control algorithms. This level of work, for no guarantee of progress, felt disproportionate to the actual role. 2. Despite the high-effort test and panel interview, the rejection email was generic and offered no constructive feedback or direction, which was surprising for a company that claims to value talent and innovation. 3. The technical expectations were incredibly deep, ranging from high-level systems engineering down to low-level programming more aligned with a senior specialist yet the position wasn't titled or compensated as such. 4. No recognition or appreciation for the time and depth invested in the assignment or the interview process. This was disheartening after putting in genuine thought and technical depth. Advice to the company: 1. Be more transparent with technical expectations upfront. If you’re looking for someone who can design and develop system from scratch (basically a one person department), say so clearly in the JD post. 2. Respect candidate time and effort, especially when asking for detailed assignments. 3. Offer constructive feedback. A short paragraph on what was missing would go a long way in making candidates feel respected. 4. Consider whether your current process might deter talented individuals who don’t fit 100% of a broad technical checklist, but who could grow into the role with support.