3 interviews: 1. Call with HR. 2. On site interview with VP or CTO (I don't remember the title). 3. On site technical interview. I had interview #2 online, because knowing nothing concrete about position it makes no sense to go on site. But usually company prefers to have this interview on site. First 2 interviews are quite adequate and interesting. VP/CTO is very clever guy, it's always a pleasure to talk with such people. Interview with him was about company, products and position. Then high level technical and organizational questions. Technical interview was with Architect, developer and dev ops guy. Developer and dev ops guy thought in terms of cool and not cool, not in terms of effectiveness and pros/cons. For example - do you like Maven or Gradle more? This is a typical for junior/medium level. Architect has a big ego. He showed his role is very important and he is decision maker there. However he could not ask questions clearly. Asking for clarification made him aggressive. This is also typical for a guy with big ego and small cognitive abilities - they don't like others showing they don't do something good. He was interested only in buzz words and terms, he wasn't interested in what was behind them. For example you should know exactly a term used by few people - it doesn't matter if you don't remember a term but know exactly what it is on practise. He was surprised that a monolith can be scalable but then quickly became angry because I know this and he doesn't. Nobody is allowed to know something that this architect doesn't know! He thinks that it's normal and good to have a legacy solution that is used actively with 0 code coverage. I'm not really sure what such architect does in this company. But he is good in motivating people to believe him obviously :-) After some time an architect decided not to hire me implicitly and showed clearly he doesn't care about me further during the interview (he didn't say this). After 10 minutes he decided to leave the interview but was surprised I immediately said I'm going to leave now too. For me it was a fun game already to play with their reaction. Everybody removed positive impressions from their faces and looked like a guilty child when they had to meet my eyes after interviews. All these were so fun to see :-) HRs guaranteed that a trip for on site interviews will be reimbursed. But they don't care about it. They don't tell you when they will do it. Instead they tell - you should reach us in case you don't receive anything again and again. The company doesn't verify how people write source code during interviews. When I asked why so, they replied they have a probation period to fire people whose code they don't like or for something else they didn't check and that they don't like!!! Then I decided to verify how they treat quality (assuming they don't show any test tasks and I cannot verify their expectations to quality). They don't care about quality. There are no standards - people do whatever they find cool. No formal processes and approaches related to quality. Hello Resume Driven Development. They reject me by firstly saying that I'm guilty for not accepting their phone call one morning. Then they said I am a very positive person but am not competent enough from technical side (hello Architect :-) ).