Fairly standard. Recruiter screen followed by a call with the hiring manager. They then sent over a technical assignment. It was pretty standard affair in terms of testing one's ability to use a low code solution but a bit odd in terms of purpose / GTM value. It did not test anything along those lines which made more sense in the next rounds. What followed was a call with their "Head of GenAI". While he seemed familiar with low-code tooling, he got stuck on why I bothered with normalizing/structuring data which I thought was odd. I looked into his experience and it doesn't paint a picture of someone with a deep background in AI. Despite some awkwardness there, I went on to a call with a founder. He was pretty scattergun in the sense he just went right into asking what I was currently working on, would interrupt in a pretty pointed manner to ask "why" I was doing what I was doing (while I was in the middle of explaining my work) and generally did not seem to really understand or be interested in anything I was telling him. Some of his questions made sense but some of the stuff he got stuck on reminded me of my call with the Head of GenAI in the sense that they weren't challenging or important questions. They ended up passing on me which was not a surprise. I think their evaluation criteria was a little off and ultimately this was the best thing for both parties.