Not a process I would recommend.
The interviews were technically interesting, but the evaluation felt inconsistent and very very unfair. Different stages communicated different expectations, and the final rejection feedback did not match the actual system design discussion at all.
The interviewer explicitly moved rapidly across multiple unrelated topics as part of the format, yet the final feedback later claimed that "edge cases, trade-offs, and scalability considerations had to be introduced by the interviewer". That was not an accurate reflection of the discussion, where I had proactively covered scalability, Kafka/outbox, retry/idempotency, transaction modeling, reconciliation, multi-tenancy, and partial failure handling.
The process gave the impression of subjective calibration and retrofitted feedback rather than a clear, transparent senior engineering evaluation. Based on my experience, candidates should think very carefully before investing significant time in this process, as the time investment may not be treated with the same level of fairness and consistency.
