After a brief screening phone call with HR I was invited for a technical interview in person. There were a senior Java and a .NET developer and a manager from HR. After introductions I got reasonable questions to assess the depth of my knowledge of Java, OOP, and Spring. Then I received a behavioural/moral excercise presumably designed to reveal something about my character. A few standard HR questions followed at the end. I did not get an offer because they were looking for a seasoned Java developer with instant outsourcing value, and my knowledge apparently did not reach up to that level. On the other hand I was looking for a full-stack position where I can expand on my backend skills. The outcome was understandable. The interview was okay overall, both parties were able to discover the information about the other to make a decision. However there are a few things that could have gone better. I raised my eyebrows when I was told that constructor injection is a bad practice in Spring since version 2. And since I said I preferred to use this pattern so far, I was told we can not continue with further questions then. I duly noted their stance. The behavioural question/game felt weird all the way of the entire five minutes. I have not received any feedback after the interview. That is a shame. At least a "we picked someone else" would have been decent to officially inform me about the outcome. I would have been also especially curious what the behavioural game gave away about me.