The initial interview process itself was fair — it was an hour structured Teams interview where the hiring panel asked relevant questions about experience and suitability. I have no issues with the interviewers themselves. I was told during interview that second round will be held the following week and given i hadn't received sceduling invite in the next couple of days i assumed that i wasn't selected and naturally moved on. However, what followed next was extremely disappointing and misleading.End of following week after the interview, I received an email from what was called the "Denver Hiring Team" — which is, in fact, the Candidate Experience Team based in the Philippines. The email subject and contents were titled things like “Feedback – Can we talk?” and referenced “next steps”, offering a link to book a call. This gave the clear impression that I was moving forward in the process — potentially a second round or even offer discussion — especially given the team’s name implies direct hiring authority. Only after some reflection (and external research) did it become clear that this was actually a rejection call masked under ambiguous wording designed to drive KPI engagement. Referring to a rejection team as a “hiring team,” and framing a rejection call as “next steps” and “feedback,” is incredibly misleading to candidates who are already in a vulnerable position waiting for outcomes. IQ-EQ should seriously review this process. Transparency and respect go a long way, and this felt unnecessarily disingenuous. If this is meant to improve the candidate experience, it had the opposite effect.