Interviewed for a senior technical role through a multi-stage process and invested significant effort on the case study stage. The case brief was explicit: the audience would consist of domain specialists and peers, and candidates were asked to discuss formulations in depth, including specific technical components along with overall problem structuring. I prepared accordingly with detailed technical content calibrated to the stated audience. The feedback after the case was that the content was too technical for the room. The hiring manager later acknowledged the brief wording did not match the actual audience composition. Despite this, the rejection cited "communication effectiveness in cross-functional settings" as the primary reason. The brief had given no indication that audience would be cross-functional. The feedback on 'communication issues' is ironic, given the brief itself failed to communicate effectively to candidates what was actually being assessed. Individual interactions were professional in tone. But the gap between what the brief asked for and what was actually evaluated points to internal alignment and expectation gaps in the hiring process. Worth being aware of as a senior candidate. My advice to anyone going through this process: regardless of what the brief or the seniority of attendees implies, ask explicitly about audience composition and evaluation criteria before investing in case prep. Don't assume the written brief reflects what the room actually wants.