The interview process was long and inconsistent. It stretched over several months and included multiple panel interviews, technical deep dives, leadership conversations, a "final" leadership conversation, a second "final" leadership conversation, and additional follow-ups after the official rounds were supposedly complete. Throughout the process, role expectations kept shifting due to internal politics. Communication was strong at first. I was repeatedly told I was a top candidate, that I had “knocked it out of the park” in multiple rounds, and even reached the stage where references were contacted and once again received positive feedback. After that point, the process stalled. I received no clear updates and communication became increasingly ambiguous for another 2–3 weeks. Eventually, I was rejected citing a “lack of alignment from management with their future vision of the role.” This so-called “future vision” was never communicated or discussed, was not reflected in the job description, and frankly, it’s hard to understand how such a decision was made based on an undefined future vision — especially in a fast-evolving startup where things change every 6 months. This experience left me drained, frustrated, confused, and with a poor lasting impression. It’s disappointing to see a company that claims to value integrity and experience treat candidates this way. I will not consider interviewing with them again. For anyone considering the process here: go in with eyes open, and be prepared for unclear asks, moving targets, and shifting priorities.