I cold emailed the recriuter and my resume was shortlisted. I appreciate the depth and rigor of the interview loop itself. The six technical and managerial rounds were well-structured, relevant to the role, and allowed me to demonstrate both IC depth and people-management capabilities. The interviewers were prepared, technically strong, and the overall signal from the panel was consistently communicated as a strong hire. The quality of the interview loop reflects positively on the engineering teams involved and shows that the organization values high technical and leadership standards at the evaluation stage. The recruitment experience for a senior role was deeply mismanaged and caused unnecessary stress, confusion, and loss of trust. Despite being communicated as a strong hire after clearing six rigorous interview rounds, it took nearly 50 days for the initial offer to be released. During this period, timelines were unclear, follow-ups were largely candidate-driven, and there was a lack of ownership and urgency from the recruiting side. More concerning was the post-offer re-leveling. The role was interviewed, evaluated, and offered as Staff SDET, which I accepted and signed. During subsequent re-leveling discussions, I was explicitly told by the recruiter that the role would be updated to Associate Director of Engineering, given the people-management and org-level scope. This directly influenced my decision to continue with the process and decline other opportunities. However, this position was later reversed, and I was informed that the final title would instead be Senior SDET 2, which is a clear down-leveling and does not reflect the discussed responsibilities (people management + IC ownership). Introducing such fundamental changes after offer acceptance severely undermines the credibility of the hiring process. Additionally, the fixed base compensation offered was lower than my existing base, despite seniority, scope, and strong interview feedback. Negotiations relied heavily on brand value and future promises (e.g., fast-tracked promotions) rather than clear Day-1 alignment. Suggestions: For senior hires, internal alignment on leveling, title, scope, and compensation must be finalized before extending offers. Verbal assurances, delayed offers, and post-acceptance changes create avoidable trauma for candidates and result in losing strong talent despite successful interview loops. The interview panel demonstrated high quality; unfortunately, the recruitment execution did not meet the same standard.