The interview was highly interactive, combining a mix of insightful questions and practical exercises. This approach allowed for a dynamic exchange and provided a comprehensive assessment of my skills and abilities.

The conversations were interesting and the product seems promising, but the overall candidate experience was disappointing. The process included three interview steps, all with senior stakeholders, including a final conversation that took place quite late in the day and in suboptimal conditions, with connectivity issues and interruptions. Given the technical nature of the role, I was also surprised that there was no clear assessment of my technical skills, implementation approach, or ability to manage customer-facing technical delivery. After being told that some internal calibration was still ongoing, the process ended with a generic rejection and no actionable feedback, despite the time invested. For candidates reaching later stages, clearer communication, better interview conditions, a more structured technical evaluation, and more specific feedback would make the process feel more respectful and more aligned with the seniority of the role.