I was referred for this position by another AWS employee who knew that you really have to push to get a referral in front of hiring managers. The first (of 3) recruiters reached out to me to explain the process. The recruiters aren't really going to ask you any questions. I wouldn't be surprised if this part of the recruiting process gets converted to video that you watch yourself, because they were clearly reading me a script telling me about the leadership principles and how to prepare for the interview. The first screening interview went well. We had a lot in common and he seemed to want me to make the cut. It was nice to feel that he didn't think his job was to keep me out. The on-site, which was actually done remotely over two days was kind of hit or miss. There is a huge difference in quality between experience and inexperienced interviewers. The experienced interviewers realize that they are interviewing you for a job and the goal of the interview is to determine how much you know and how you think to see whether you would be a good fit. The inexperienced interviews are basically grading you on your performance, without considering whether that performance really translates to the job itself. Also, you can tell with inexperienced interviewers that they are just reading the questions, typing while you talk, then moving onto the next questions. It was clear that the hiring manager didn't see me as a fit, so that was a little discouraging. I didn't get the job, but honestly, going through the process with the leadership principles and preparing for the interviews helped me considerably in organizing my work experience and my stories in a much more meaningful way, which has paid off with other interviews.

Pros: The recruiter, Richa, was excellent—professional, communicative, and the highlight of the experience. Cons: The interview process for a Senior Technical Writer role is incredibly grueling (7 rounds), including screening, multiple PM/TPM rounds, and a written assessment. I progressed through the first five rounds with consistently positive feedback; HR confirmed that the team was "inclined" to hire. However, the process derailed during the 6th round (Bar Raiser) with Ayush Aggarwal. Despite the role being for a Senior Technical Writer, the interviewer approached the session as if he were interviewing a Software Developer. He asked absurdly granular questions about specific parameters from documentation I wrote at my very first company years ago—details that had no bearing on my current seniority or the role's requirements. The most disappointing part was the lack of integrity in the final decision. After this one round, the recruiter informed me that the entire panel—who had previously been "inclined" and praised my API test document—suddenly changed their assessment to "not inclined." It appears that at this company, the initial objective evaluations of five different people can be overwritten overnight to align with a single mismatched Bar Raiser's opinion. Advice to Management: Calibrate your Bar Raisers to the actual job family they are interviewing. When a panel "flips" their feedback overnight to match one negative signal, it suggests a hiring culture driven by consensus-pressure rather than an honest evaluation of talent.