The technical screening interview was very easy, it was in-house so not a 3rd party like Karat, and the proctor was someone actually on the team I was applying for. The on-site had three parts: 1. Technical deep dive - you choose a project you've done and describe the system/architecture. I had a good experience here, interviewer was also someone on the team I was applying for. At the end, I asked for feedback and they gave me some. 2. Object Oriented Design - this was the bit that caused the offer rejection, and also a pretty negative experience. The interviewer wasn't someone on the team, and they had a difficult time describing the problem, the expectations, and the purpose of the exercise, even when clarification was requested. The exercise was "design a restaurant" in which you're expected to have a Customer class, Waiter class, etc. The interviewer insisted on the system reflecting a "real" restaurant, despite my attempts to contextualize it in software terms. This is their choice on how they want to conduct the interview, but I felt like it was a poor exercise for demonstrating my experience building large object oriented architectures. 3. Hiring Manager meeting - this bit was also positive. The red flag for me during this was the stress they put on "on call" responsibilities, they made it clear that there was a rotation where you'd be expected to have 24 hour on-call duty. Overall, I think there are improvements to be made to their process, and I don't think it lends itself to finding the best talent, especially at the IC3+ level. The OO design bit felt condescending/childish, and it felt the least developed. I let my recruiter know as such. Turnaround time for a rejection was two business days. Process moved relatively quickly otherwise.