I have previously worked with Barclays for over 4 years through Infosys and Capgemini, and was referred for this opportunity by an existing Barclays employee with whom I had worked on the same project for 3 years. When contacted by HR, I was informed that the process would include 2 rounds: a technical interview followed by a values interview. I successfully cleared both rounds. However, after these interviews, I was unexpectedly told that I would have to take an online test—one that, I was told, would be the deciding factor in my selection. This was never mentioned at the start of the process. More concerning, the test was described as “very difficult” and one which supposedly measures values, without having any right or wrong answers. Unfortunately, I was rejected based on this test, despite my proven track record of performance at Barclays and positive feedback from my supervisors during my earlier tenure. My concern is this: if such a test is considered more decisive than interviews taken by real people, shouldn’t it be conducted at the beginning rather than after multiple interview rounds? Adding it at the very end, without prior notice, undermines the candidate’s time, effort, and expectation. I also question whether such an automated test is truly capable of understanding human values. I urge Barclays to try administering it to current successful employees—you may be surprised at how many would “fail” it. In my view, this process lacks fairness and transparency, and risks rejecting strong, proven candidates. I am sharing this not because I expect any change in my case, but because I believe there is a serious issue in how the HR process is being managed. Unfortunately, I have also seen similar trends in other organizations, where HR seems more inclined towards external hires than internal referrals for an extra commission through 3rd party. I'm not sure how much of that applies here but I'm seriously worried about this.