AutoRek interview questions

Excessively Long Interview Process with Poor Feedback Application: I applied online and the process took over a month. It was four rounds, The first interview, with the recruiter(quick screening), Second an online test in HackerRank , Third a two hours long technical interview with live coding questions to solve and finally an HR/behavioural round. Pros: The technical rounds were well-structured and challenging, allowing candidates to demonstrate their abilities. The recruitment team was polite during interactions. Cons: The process spanned over six weeks, during which I completed multiple rounds, only to receive vague and inconsistent feedback at the end. After being informed I had cleared the technical round, I moved to final round HR interview after which I was not selected. when I asked for feedback I was later told my technical skills(technical questions which I answered in the previous technical round) were not a fit, which felt contradictory and frustrating. Requests for further clarification on feedback were ignored, leaving me without actionable insights despite investing significant time and energy in the process. Advice to Management: Respect candidates' time by ensuring the interview process is efficient and well-structured. Provide clear, timely, and constructive feedback, especially when candidates have invested substantial effort over a prolonged period. Maintain transparency in communication to avoid sending conflicting messages about a candidate's performance.

First interview was with HR, which felt rushed but I was given immediate feedback that I was being passed to the next stage. Next stage was a chat with a team member, where majority of the time was spent running through a project plan that I have created (approx 30 mins). Final stage was with two senior members of the team where it lasted for nearly an hour. Up until the final stage, I felt positive about the role. It felt a bit like a classic good/bad cop interview where the questioning routes were often repetitive, and at times it felt like my answers had to be repeated. Majority of the questions were very much focussed on delivering negative news to clients and managing difficult conversations both internally and externally. While I appreciate the purpose of the question, the final stage interviewers seemed to fail to recognise the impact of the question on a prospective candidate. I left the interview questioning how soon I'll have to deliver or manage such negative interactions with clients and/or internal stakeholders. It was also very clear they've been having staff issues, particularly when I was told that 'we need someone who can muck in and not question why they're working longer hours; it is common to have meetings put in on top of other meetings'.