The interview process has 3 parts. I passed the first 2 rounds and get rejected after the 3rd round. 1. Tech screen: 15 minutes talk with peer 2. Code test: Very light system design question with a coding challenge (2 peers with candidate) 3. In-depth technical questions (candidate with 2 architect) 4. Final round with HR Right out of the gate, there is no hiring manager round, what it interests me is that future employee and their manager don't get to meet each other. All companies I interviewed start their process with hiring manager round which would give the candidate a feel of what the manager like in the future, because a lot of people nowadays still "quit their boss" instead of quitting their job. I know Amazon evaluate skills before meeting manager, but at least they have hiring manager round (in their hiring event, after candidates passed the code test, they are provided with as many hiring managers as possible in the company to make sure they like each other before joining a team, their managers need to sell themselves and make their team sound appealing to win over the candidates). So I asked what the managing style looks like in PayTM, and what is the process when it comes to transferring teams. The interviewers replied "I see people get to transfer because they don't like the tech stack they are working on and sometime we just have project which needs all hands on deck", this sounds fine to me for companies this size, they don't have ton of resources given their size. But they said after with this "The managing style differs from team to team". Dude, then provide me a round to figure out if I like my future boss please. Isn't interview a 2 way street? Okay, with hiring manager out of the way, I will try to elaborate what I think its the culprit with the company's process here. They call their first round "tech screen", but it doesn't make any impact on the whole process, they didn't care if you don't know this or that. In my case, I didn't have lots of hands on experience with Database, they said it's okay, as long as you can code (not the direct quote, but similar) and passed me. Then I needs to go through a code test online with 2 other developers, before the 3rd round. Let me give more information on the 3rd round. It is literally like what others are saying here. The interviewers asked you how does HashMap work, what is advantage/disadvantage for Normalization/Denormalization. What I consider differently here with other reviews is that, I don't mind them asking questions can be easily found using google, other companies do that too. What I do mind is the order. Usually, when a company has a hard requirement for a certain technology, they would check it in the earlier stage, it requires less effort for both parties. So if they really want me to have DB knowledge, they could have done it in the first round and failed me, then they won't have to ask 2 of their developers time to do the code challenge (I'm a morning person, but they have to wake up early to meet me at 9AM, and I saw the female interviewer had to put on makeups). It not only made me waste hours to prepare, it wasted your company 2 menhours. I know you don't care about my time but please treat your own employees' time with respect. Now I know some people may say, in the end, it's a game, candidate needs to put on a show to make sure they have a better chance, and company would do the same to distil the truth underneath. I have interviewed with company saying the interview process is purely language-agnostic, we are perfectly fine for you to learn on the job just to pass me into the next round where they required testing certain language. But at least they did it before the code challenge so I can fail-fast. I understand companies do this just to make sure they have largest possible candidate pool, but what PayTM did here is they dangle the hope in front of candidates for too long that it makes it feel unethical. I hope this review can reach to someone inside PayTM who has the power to make a difference. Otherwise, I hope this will help their future candidates to have better mental preparation stepping in. In the end, I want to add this, I believe interview process can somewhat reflect the company culture, and a good culture will take a company further. Amazon is a good example, they train their employees who want to be interviewers to treat their candidates as customers before they go into interviews, this is inline with their culture (customer obsession), and look how big it has grown now. (In Amazon, you need to have 2 1-hour training, be a shadow interviewer to see how interviews are conducted for 5 rounds and reverse-shadowed by a seasoned interviewer another 5 rounds before you are qualified to go solo). I know I sound like a sore loser but even if they made me a 200k offer (which they can't), I would rather go for a good company with good culture for 140k.