The process took 30+ days. I made it through each round ( Initial phone screen, recruiter screen, manager screen, take home assignment, and onsite with 6 people ). I find out after 30 days that Greenhouse does not think I have the "project management skills and technical acumen" for the role. For a company that is trying to be so innovative with best practices in hiring, how are candidates who are accused of not "meeting" the basic qualifications making it through to the final round? This process was a complete waste of my time. Before applying I spent 2 weeks researching and really deep diving into this company's culture, strategy, products, and people. During my phone screens, I really asked meaningful questions about the role and the work I would be doing. I work for a commercial company and I provide project management and technical services at a much larger scale . My education is also specialized in technology and analytics. So to have my industry knowledge and technical acuity challenged during the final stages of an interview is disappointing. It seems I was the perfect candidate until I showed up to the office. I would love to know what data was collected to make this decision because I wasn't asked technical questions by ANYONE. I presented my take-home assignment with no issues. Greenhouse's screening process should be re-evaluated. The teams should also iterate and figure out if they are trying to hire a unicorn, or if they are looking to add someone who has relevant experience and can positively impact the company in the future. I know my review may be perceived as a candidate's inability to receive feedback/ rejection, or perhaps it can look like I am just bitter that an offer was not extended, that is not the case. Ask yourself how you would feel if after 30 days you learn a company does not think you have the basic skillset for the job.