I was recently involved in this company’s recruitment process, having been approached directly for a role that aligned very closely with my experience. Following an initial screening interview, it was mutually agreed that my background, particularly in building agentic AI workflows in my current role, was an excellent fit for the position. I was then invited to complete a technical test, which I did within the requested timeframe. What followed was… educational. After submitting the test, there was no response for approximately a month. An email then arrived saying the team would “look into it in the next couple of days”, followed by a further two weeks of silence. Another apology email arrived, promising an update shortly. This was again followed by silence. Several weeks later, I noticed the same role was still being actively advertised on LinkedIn. Hoping for closure, or at least feedback, I applied again, this time including a cover letter politely asking for an update on my previous submission. There was no response. Roughly two weeks after that, I received a generic rejection email thanking me for my interest and confirming I would not be progressing. This appeared to relate to the second application, rather than the original process initiated by the company themselves. At no point did I receive feedback on the technical test, any meaningful communication, or any indication that the process was being actively managed. The overall impression is of a hiring system so fragmented that it appears to be working against itself, and a recruitment function that is either under-resourced, poorly coordinated, or simply disengaged. Whichever it is, the end result is the same. Strong candidates are left in limbo, time and effort are taken for granted, and opportunities are quietly missed. Recruitment may not be the most technically demanding function in an organisation, but basic communication is not an unreasonable expectation. Leaving candidates, particularly those approached directly, to drift indefinitely is, at best, careless. More fool the company, ultimately. Owing entirely to their own inability to manage a straightforward hiring process, they have managed to pass over a well-qualified engineer who was an obvious fit for the role. I would strongly encourage them to review not just their hiring process, but whether anyone is actually steering it.