I recently went through the interview process with Intersnack, and it left me with mixed feelings. It began with friendly and efficient email exchanges and an initial interview with the recruiter, who was communicative and thorough. This was followed by a professional and engaging Zoom call with team members, leaving me with a positive impression of the team’s dynamic and professionalism.
The process then moved to an in-person interview in Düsseldorf, where I met with HR, the team director, and a technical team member for nearly two hours. During this meeting, we discussed my salary expectations, and I was even encouraged to consider increasing them. We agreed on an exact start date, and the interview delved deeply into specific project details, typically reserved for internal discussions. They went over multiple issues in detail, often asking how I would handle and resolve them, with several back-and-forth discussions on particulars I wouldn’t usually expect to be privy to.
Five days later, the recruiter contacted me, unexpectedly informing me of my rejection. He mentioned he was just as surprised by the decision and didn’t know the reason, promising to find out but never following up. Looking back, despite assurances about the role’s urgency, it had been open for months and continues to be reposted frequently. Combined with the intense focus on project specifics during the interviews, it raises questions about whether they’re seeking input from experts without genuine hiring intentions.
While the team was professional and welcoming, the lack of transparency and follow-through turned an otherwise positive experience into a disheartening one.