The interview process consisted of a total of 5 rounds:

• 1 HackerRank Test
• 3 Technical Zoom Calls
• 1 HR Round

I was able to reach up to the 3rd technical round but was then rejected. The recruiter did not inform me of the rejection; I had to call them to find out.

1st Technical Round:

• Basic output questions based on OOPS and Java Concepts, such as Anonymous Inner Classes and Covariant Return Types.
• A program to find the first duplicate character in a string. (Tip: Ensure you know this, but don't reveal your knowledge.)
• A program to find the second highest salary from a list of Person objects.
• How to implement a Singleton class object for an application running on two servers, ensuring both can access the same object.

2nd Technical Round:

This was a pair programming round. I was asked about the internal workings of HashMap, TreeMap, and LinkedHashMap.

• A program to find the common intersection point of two linked lists.
• A program to traverse an n-ary Tree using BFS.

3rd Technical Round:

This round focused entirely on application architecture. I was asked about the architecture of my current project and ways to improve certain tasks based on my input. There seemed to be a communication gap, as the interviewer repeatedly asked how my Java class would look. When I asked if I needed to write code, she denied it, stating she wanted a verbal explanation, but then asked me to "improvise it." I responded that I had explained it to the best of my knowledge. At the end of the interview, I asked for advice on improvising it. She suggested writing it in my free time, but when I asked for a hint, she kept repeating the same statement.

The third technical round focused entirely on application architecture. I was asked about the architecture of my current project and how to improve certain tasks based on my input. However, for some reason, I believe there was a communication gap.

The interviewer repeatedly asked how my Java classes would look. When I asked if I needed to write code, she denied it, stating she wanted a verbal explanation but then asked me to "improvise it." I responded that I had explained it to the best of my knowledge.

At the end of the interview, after it concluded, I asked for her view on how to improve. She advised me to write it out in my free time and I would notice the improvements. I requested at least a hint to guide me in that direction, but she kept repeating the same statement.