I did a screener via a video Teams call with a panel. It was very scripted and robotic, as others have said — the only words they spoke were from the script, and they didn’t react to or acknowledge any of my answers. It was a deeply odd experience, and it should have been replaced by a written questionnaire (which the application also required), or by a voice-only meeting. That would probably reduce bias, too. They sent the questions to me 24 hrs before my interview — four questions in a 20 minute meeting, so I planned for about 3-4 minutes per response and exactly used my allotted time. All were “tell me about a time when…” questions that referenced specific things. In the intro, they said (via the script) that I wasn’t allowed to ask questions in this interview, and that I’d be able to ask them in the next interview. It was just odd and alienating, and I honestly wonder what kind of candidate does well with it. I didn’t make it past the screener.

The interview process consisted of a telephone interview and two face-to-face interviews. All of this was not to compete for an actual job, but for an opportunity to be put into the "pool" in case a job opened up. All in all it was quite unsatisfying, because even after three long sessions, even if you are successful, you aren't getting a job. You're given the opportunity to wait, along with 180 other poor fools.