A weird technical interview. First they ask you random abstract questions more or less from the tech area, like how to best choose a database, without any context, then they ask you to review a bit of code that can be improved of course, but without much context (again) you're left to yourself. And then you've got a lengthly explanation of a pretty simple setup that you need to try and abstractly debug. All of this in a very cold and unwelcoming way.

I recently had an unusual technical interview experience following an initial HR screening. The position in question was for an engineering manager role, yet the interviewer seemed to lack the experience typically associated with evaluating such a position, which felt misaligned with the seniority of the role. The interview was divided into three parts: code refactoring, a case study, and a technical talk. I approached each segment confidently and even recorded my answers for self-review afterward. Upon revisiting my work, I found that I had performed well. However, the interview process was disappointing. The interviewer appeared unprepared and unable to provide clarity on their own questions. When I sought clarification, their responses included phrases like "I don't know," "I'm too lazy to ask," "You can ask others in the next steps," or even "I don't care." This gave the impression of an unprofessional and reluctant approach, making the experience feel more like a formality than a meaningful evaluation. Ultimately, I received a rejection with no feedback, but by then, I had already realized there was a significant mismatch between my expectations and the company's structure and processes. It left me questioning the overall suitability of the organization for someone in a leadership role.