Two telephonic rounds involved coding exercises. My experience level was average.

I was called for an onsite interview, I believe for the Hive/CDH team. The onsite interview experience went like this:

• I was allocated a conference room for the entire day I was there (about 5-6 hours).
• The first interview was with the dev lead. Since he was remote, the interview was conducted on Skype. I was asked to write a program related to a search/replace algorithm. Everything was fine; I might have slightly messed up the wildcard characters, but the logic was not bad, in my opinion. The interviewer was fine.
• The second interview was with a QA engineer on the East Coast. This one was really unprofessional and focused mostly on whether I was contracting with a specific company listed on my resume or if I was a full-time employee. It felt like a waste of time.
• The third interview was with another remote QA engineer. This interviewer was professional and logical.
• The fourth interview was with a local senior QA engineer. She was professional and asked mostly related questions.
• I am missing one interview as I don't remember the details, but it was fine.

That concluded the interviews. About a week later, when I asked for an update, the recruiter responded that the first interviewer, who was the dev lead on Hive, did not approve me. The rest of the feedback was positive. It was strange because if the decision to hire or not hire relies on one person's feedback, why bother with so many interviewers? Especially when the position is for a Senior SDET, rejecting a candidate solely based on a dev lead's assessment is perplexing.

Coding exercises. Nothing too difficult.