The process consisted of a screening call from the recruiter, submission of a CV and cover letter. If successful you are asked to carry out an online, timed writing test. If this is passed, a telephone group interview. I failed at this point but after this a face to face interview was needed in Amsterdam (even though the role was based in London). The Amsterdam interview would have consisted of three separate interviews. This seems excessive for a fairly low level role and very odd to not visit the office or staff where the role would be based. After passing the writing test, a telephone interview was arranged around a month later. It consisted of a telephone interview with two people. The interview lasted around 45 minutes in total. Questions were mostly the usual questions about the role, with some more general ones based on your personality and extra curricular activities. I was not successful in the role after the telephone interview. The feedback I received was quite rude and contradictory. They mainly criticised my writing test saying I would need significant training regarding what is required of an abstract - I do not really understand this when they said I passed the test and allowed me to proceeded to the next stage. I was also told I was not receptive to feedback on this task but I was only given one point in where it could be improved which I politely acknowledged. No other questions or feedback were given on this. Overall, I found the process extremely drawn out and over the top for the position and salary on offer (it is essentially an entry level position that requires a PhD - 5/6 stages of interview seem excessive). The feedback could be handled in a more constructive way, and if the abstract wasn't of the level required it would be better to end the process at this stage rather than wasting the several hours spent preparing and the telephone interview itself.