3 rounds 1 call with TA 2 lengthy Python Assessment 3 Interview with Principle I recently went through a thorough recruitment process that began with a detailed call with a Talent Acquisition specialist, where we discussed my background, skills, and alignment with the role. This was followed by a comprehensive Python assessment that tested my abilities in data manipulation, clustering, visualization, and involved solving complex problems. The assessment was rigorous and covered a wide range of topics, requiring in-depth knowledge and practical application. Following this, I had an in-depth interview with a principal, where we explored my experience and approach to problem-solving in even greater detail. The entire process was extensive and allowed me to showcase my technical skills and problem-solving abilities effectively. Suggestion: They should redefine their interview process. Should treat it as a professional interview or 2 way conversation. I felt totally being ignored during the interview. I lost motivation within the first five minutes when the interviewer, Interviewer, did not start by providing any introduction to the team or explaining the role and its responsibilities. Throughout the interview, Interviewer seemed to be in a rush, asking questions rapidly without allowing for meaningful dialogue or conversation. During the SQL portion, I suggested using HackerRank for accuracy as suggested by TA recruiter, but Interviewer read SQL question aloud without sharing screen. When I requested the question in writing, Interviewer only sent a partial version, making it challenging to construct a proper query without knowing crucial details like the schema or date formats. Despite these challenges, I wrote a correct SQL query for the given scenario in MS Word while sharing my screen. However, Interviewer did not ask any counter questions about my approach, such as why I chose certain methods or logic, which missed an opportunity to explore my reasoning and problem-solving skills. When it was my turn to ask questions, I ended up explaining my previous FinOps project myself in the last part of the interview, which I would have expected the Interviewer to ask about instead. This lack of engagement was disheartening, as it did not allow for any demonstration of my expertise in this area. The interaction lacked any two-way conversation, particularly regarding my experience with FinOps. When I mentioned my previous FinOps projects, Interviewer response was simply "Good," with no further exploration. The interview abruptly ended in under 30 minutes, despite the significant time and effort I had invested in the Jira Python assessment and preparing for the interview. Overall, this experience made me feel undervalued as a candidate. I hope this feedback helps in refining the interview process to ensure candidates feel respected, engaged, and given a fair opportunity to demonstrate their skills. Update: I see there is another review from another candidate with similar views like mine. Which means Atlasian really needs to review their Finops hiring/Interview process and norms.