I rate the interview process as "neutral" because 2 out of the 3 interviews I had were positive. First, I need to give some background. The tech stack for the position is Oracle / Java, whereas my tech background is SQL Server / .NET. However, I do have some Oracle experience and the job description came across as tech neutral, so I applied. A few days later, I received an invite for the standard HR screening. The screening went well, and I had a nice conversation with the company's recruiter. A few days after that, I received an invite to interview with the hiring manager. This interview also went well, and I was told that the hiring manager liked me. It was the third interview that prompted me to write this review. When I get to a third interview, I expect that the company understands my technical background and is okay with it. I spent days preparing answers for both my knowledge of Oracle and for questions regarding my potential duties as a team lead. The interviewer didn't ask me a single question about either one of these areas, and I left the interview feeling like her mind had been made up before we even started the call. At no point did I misrepresent myself or my technical knowledge. Being unemployed is stressful enough without a company wasting my time on an interview when they already know I don't have the technical background they are looking for. If a company has questions about my abilities, then I would expect some kind of assessment on those abilities. Having been a manager myself, I would never put a candidate through three rounds of interviews if I didn't think the candidate had the required technical background. I don't think I'm being unreasonable in my expectations. Medidata seems like a nice company to work for, but I don't understand their hiring practices.