Verint Systems

I recently interviewed with Verint. The first round went well, but the second round was a very disappointing experience because of the interviewer. Throughout the interview, he continuously interrupted, changed questions abruptly, and did not allow me to properly explain technical concepts or complete my thought process. The overall behavior felt unnecessarily aggressive and distracting rather than focused on evaluating skills fairly. A good interviewer listens, understands the approach, and then challenges the candidate technically. Unfortunately, this interview felt more like an attempt to dominate the conversation than a professional technical discussion. It was surprising to see such poor communication and lack of professionalism from someone conducting technical interviews. The entire process ended up being a waste of time and left a very negative impression of the interview culture. One thing I learned from this experience is that interviewing with real experts is often much easier than interviewing with people who lack the patience or technical depth to properly evaluate candidates.

I recently interviewed with Verint. The first round went well and was cleared successfully. However, the experience during the second round was extremely disappointing due to the behavior of the interviewer, Although I was answering the questions, the interviewer constantly interrupted, changed topics abruptly, and did not allow me to properly explain my thought process or technical concepts. The overall approach felt unnecessarily aggressive and more focused on creating pressure and confusion rather than genuinely evaluating technical skills. What stood out most was the lack of professionalism and basic listening skills. An interviewer should assess a candidate fairly, not try to dominate the conversation or dismiss explanations midway. The interaction felt disrespectful from the very beginning. It was surprising to see someone conducting senior-level technical interviews while displaying very limited patience, poor communication etiquette, and weak technical depth in the discussion itself. A technically strong interviewer usually encourages clarity and structured discussion; this experience was the exact opposite. The entire process ended up being a waste of time and energy. One important lesson I learned is that interviewing with true experts is often much easier and more productive than interviewing with people who are insecure or unable to evaluate concepts properly. Companies should seriously evaluate the quality and professionalism of the people representing them in interviews. There is little point in calling candidates for interviews if the process is not intended to be fair, constructive, and respectful.

1 Coding Platform Screening round (MCQ questions from Java, Design Patterns, SQL etc) 2 Technical Rounds( Core Java, Spring Boot, Microservices ) 1 Managerial/Behavioural Round ( Projects you have worked on followed by Salary discussion)

It was quick and good. The process was hassle free. The recruiters were responsive everytime. The interview process completed within 2 weeks. Had all the interviews online and visited once only for face to face interview. Overall the experience was good.

OA standard Qs- aptitude, core CS, DSA. Round 1 technical: DSA - sieve of Eratosthenes OOP based questions Project deep dive Good discussion with interviewers. Lasted 25 minutes. Result: rejected