1st interview is a screening by a recruiter. Given an overview of the company, its focus, current and future goals, growth plans, what to expect from following steps. Asked questions about motivation, current salary, etc. 2nd interview was with a Verification Director. Given more insight into the company's goals, achievements, future growth and focus followed by a more in-depth detailed information about the design verification methodology. Really focused on Python development (test generation, flows, etc.). 3rd interview was a coding session with several engineers on the other side. Given a graph related problem to solve with the engineer’s feedback on the go. 4th would have been a F2F on site. Unfortunately, the coding interview didn't go as well and so I was cut off at that point. Overall impression is lacking actual verification engineer related questioning and methodology. If you're amazing at graphs and algorithmic problem solving with optimal solution, you'll ace the coding interview. Guess this is of higher priority as of now for verification engineer interviews and moving them forward past the coding sessions than any other skill. Was told after the coding interview that the next week will be provided with feedback. Didn't happen, also the one afterwards, and the next one, you get the picture. The most negative part with this process was my perseverance to have closure and finally getting the long-awaited final feedback. A very basic and simple tip for the future is to try and always end on a positive note. If the candidate had a positive experience even if they didn't receive an offer or proceeded to the next step in the process, they may at least talk to other candidates about you and even recommend you to them if they had an amazing first impression. It's truly your closure that in the long run will get you and keep the best talent.