Round 1 covered an automation framework explanation alongside a Data Structures and Algorithms problem—specifically, finding the contiguous subarray with the maximum sum (Kadane's algorithm), which I cleared successfully. However, the second round highlighted significant gaps in their technical evaluation process. The second round was an in-person interview on campus where we had to write code on a white paper. The problem was a string compression task (e.g., converting "aaabb" to "a3b2") with edge cases for digits and special characters, which I solved with optimal O(n) time and O(1) space complexity.

Unfortunately, the interviewer lacked fundamental technical depth; they didn't even know the basic difference between Java's print() and println() functions, incorrectly assuming that print() would output elements on a new line. Furthermore, they had memorized a rigid solution using a StringBuilder with O(n) space complexity) and could not grasp why streaming the output directly achieved O(1) space without needing extra memory objects. When I raised these concerns with HR to have the white paper code reviewed by a qualified engineer, it was met with standard defensive deflection. Management really needs to review and upskill their technical panel to ensure candidates are evaluated by competent personnel who understand fundamental concepts and appreciate that problems can be solved in multiple valid ways.

1. Kadane's algorithm

2. Automation framework explanation

3. Array based problem solving input : aaabb output : a3b2 and vice versa