Emailed to take a personality test and then contacted for an interview. The interviewer seemed to be in a bad mood or didn't like their role. It was an uncomfortable conversation to get through.

There were a few to-dos before the actual interview which seems to assess comparability with the team. Although it’s hard to confirm as no one actually ever explained the why behind said activities. Overall the process felt pretty one sided. There were also some fiscal curiosities/red flags that weren’t explained well which can only mean a lack of transparency across their executive team. The fist interview was with the Senior Director of Comms who was very casual and seemed to have a scripted process. It was bizarre to watch her review/read notes or something instead of authentically engaging in the conversation. There’s also a lot of potential overlap between these roles which haven’t been fleshed out very thoroughly. Standard marketing language and process were apparently a mystery to the interviewer. For example, understanding the difference in a marcomm tech stack vs office tools like outlook. The posting for the position has also been up for months so if we’re reading between the lines here they’ve got the wrong gate keepers at the helm. Such an unfortunate situation as the nonprofit space is littered with competition and opportunity and the stages, conversations and overall process are a turn off resulting in lost impact for the broader ecosystem.