Perhaps the worst interview process of my career. All spoilt by one boorish individual whilst the others were pleasant.

Several rounds of discussion.

Round 1: Some rude senior director with a 4G connection. The position was for an enterprise architect, but he kept insisting on why I wouldn't want to take a management position. Generic technical questions without context or a realistic feel; he just wanted me to say what he wanted to hear. I felt like giving him a piece of my mind not to waste my time, but I was curious to see how the other rounds would be. The connection was so bad that I had questions in the end and requested the coordinating recruiter if I could mail them to the guy. There was no response from the recruiter or the senior director.

Round 2: Some director with a past in a startup. Very young but very talented and knew exactly what it takes for a professional interview. The technical expertise and soft skills of the interviewer were exceptional. After the abysmal first round, this second round convinced me to persist with the process. You rarely come across such panelists who can leave a positive impression in your mind.

Round 3: Senior director of another LoB. It was a neutral discussion, but the person on the other side genuinely wanted to hear about what I had worked on in the past. I decided to continue with the recruitment process. By this time, I had received a good offer elsewhere with 2x the pay in question here.

Round 4: Vice president with past experience at Amazon. A very pleasant but tough discussion in terms of the questions asked. I got a very strong feeling that with such higher-ups of such pedigree, it would be worthwhile to seriously consider the position. Very realistic, real-world questions and a demeanor which exuded leadership and confidence. A very inspiring individual.

Round 5: Was supposed to be with the HR/recruitment head. Lots of confusion in between. Finally, the recruiter called and complained that the person from Round 1 (the senior director) micromanages things and wishes to have another round. Finally, I got on the call with him. He was boorish and very rude from the beginning. I thought this was some stress test and decided to continue with the round. Lots of drama, rude comebacks, and very little tolerance for an alternative point of view. I realized this is how the chap was basically molded. Mid-point, I wanted to walk out of the interview but, out of professional courtesy, decided to persist. Unfortunately, this chap would be the direct manager for the position, and that sealed things. He gave some dismissive, vague answers and ensured the round ended there and then. I checked the pedigree of the person in question by visiting his LinkedIn profile and wasn't surprised. Pedigree doesn't come from education or brands that you work in; it's how you carry yourself in professional circles. Big job breaks and short tenures in organizations and a questionable first half of a career in terms of stints and companies. I was surprised that the recruitment team was confidently pushing his profile around, just like that of the others who were miles ahead in pedigree and professional conduct.

Long story short, there were very pleasing rounds with everyone else apart from this one individual senior director, and that nailed things. The company should think about how they will attract talent with such panelists. I accepted another offer from another company with 2x the pay here and 1x offered separately as a joining bonus. What worked for the other company was that the interview process was smooth, and that explains the pedigree of the working culture that I currently see here. Money and brand name can only go so far; recruitment experiences and hiring managers strongly determine whether talent will walk in or avoid altogether.

1. Real-world IoT point-of-sales problem. Excellent way in which the problem was presented and very good support as I answered it.

2. Price staleness algorithm using IBM Watson.