The process followed the STAR format with questions about the Amazon leadership principles. I was interviewed by 7 people over the course of three rounds. First the manager, then the immediate colleagues, then the onsite.

Pros: The recruiter, Richa, was excellent—professional, communicative, and the highlight of the experience. Cons: The interview process for a Senior Technical Writer role is incredibly grueling (7 rounds), including screening, multiple PM/TPM rounds, and a written assessment. I progressed through the first five rounds with consistently positive feedback; HR confirmed that the team was "inclined" to hire. However, the process derailed during the 6th round (Bar Raiser) with Ayush Aggarwal. Despite the role being for a Senior Technical Writer, the interviewer approached the session as if he were interviewing a Software Developer. He asked absurdly granular questions about specific parameters from documentation I wrote at my very first company years ago—details that had no bearing on my current seniority or the role's requirements. The most disappointing part was the lack of integrity in the final decision. After this one round, the recruiter informed me that the entire panel—who had previously been "inclined" and praised my API test document—suddenly changed their assessment to "not inclined." It appears that at this company, the initial objective evaluations of five different people can be overwritten overnight to align with a single mismatched Bar Raiser's opinion. Advice to Management: Calibrate your Bar Raisers to the actual job family they are interviewing. When a panel "flips" their feedback overnight to match one negative signal, it suggests a hiring culture driven by consensus-pressure rather than an honest evaluation of talent.