I interviewed for an Application Architect role at Scientific Games, but the entire recruitment process was managed by Insight Global, and it was one of the most poorly handled recruitment experiences I’ve encountered. Communication from Insight Global was slow, inconsistent, and often unclear. Simple questions took far too long to receive a response, and I was frequently told they were “waiting on Scientific Games” for updates. Later, I discovered that some of the information I was given was inaccurate or incomplete, which directly affected my progress in the process. There was also a complete lack of transparency. Early on, we aligned on the role expectations and compensation. However, by the time the process reached its final stages, the details presented were significantly different from what had been agreed, with no proper explanation. It felt misleading and unprofessional. To be clear: Scientific Games' interviewers were professional — the issues came entirely from how Insight Global managed the process. What makes this more disappointing is that had the process been handled properly, I would have accepted the offer. The role itself was appealing, but the experience with Insight Global made continuation impossible. Finally, after raising a formal complaint about the way the process was managed, Insight Global never responded at all — which only reinforced the poor experience. Overall, this process wasted a significant amount of time and caused unnecessary frustration. I would strongly recommend that Scientific Games reevaluate how Insight Global represents them to candidates. Advice to Interviewers / Recruiters: Provide accurate updates, ensure internal alignment, and treat candidates with transparency and respect — especially when recruiting for senior positions.