Chaotic, opaque, and unprofessional hiring process Pros: The individuals I spoke with (recruiter, CMO, and other executives) were polite and gave positive feedback throughout. I had the opportunity to present a full campaign deck, which was well-received. Cons: The process was chaotic, opaque, messy, and disrespectful — even the recruiter and CMO admitted they didn’t know the plan. The assessment was poorly designed and handled unprofessionally. I was re-scheduled multiple times based on the CMO’s calendar, and at one point they tried to shorten my assessment deadline after it had already started. Different candidates receiving different timelines for the same assignment is not just unfair — it raises serious legal and ethical questions. Despite positive signals at every stage, the final decision was made by stakeholders who never met me, through a résumé-only vote. The process dragged on for two months, with long silences between stages. To end that way was not just unprofessional, but insulting to the effort invested. After meeting the CMO twice, receiving rejection news only through the recruiter months later — with even the recruiter confused — was deeply disappointing and showed no respect for communication. Advice to Management: Inform candidates upfront of the hiring plan. If there is no plan, create one before hiring. Make the timeline respectful — two months with inconsistent communication is unreasonable. Keep things fair — assessments must have the same timelines for all candidates; unequal treatment is at best unprofessional and at worst potentially illegal. Communicate directly — if candidates meet senior leaders, they deserve closure from those leaders, not a second-hand note from a recruiter months later.