The interview process itself is well laid out. It's the interviewers who are irresponsible and irate. The first round was a technical round. The interviewer here was patient and understood the job description before joining the interview. He asked questions that were relevant to the role and was patient and interactive. We discussed a lot of technologies, architectures, and shortcomings, and got to learn a lot. It was overall a good interview, and it felt more like a productive use of time. The second interview was technical as well and was with the architects. I felt this would be diving deep into my experience and skills, and system design, e.t.c. However, it felt more like an interview for a fresher just out of college. The interviewers were a bit unprofessional compared to the interviewer in the first round, and wanted every answer/code to be syntactically correct. As someone who interviews a lot of people as part of my job, I understand the purpose of a second technical interview is to get to know the ins and outs of a candidate's technical skills. This interview, however, had an interrogation vibe. They were not open to discussion or solving scenario-based questions (as it generally happens in a second technical round), or the approach to solve a problem, but were more interested in actual implementation and code. I, however, tried to answer all the questions thrown at me. I got the feeling from the interviewers that they wanted to test the A-Z of my technical skills in a 1-hour interview, which is almost always impossible. I didn't receive any response from HR after this round, which I am fine with. My sincere suggestion to the talent acquisition or HR team is to please select interviewers who have at least some interviewing experience.