I was recently contacted by a Recruiter from Revolut for a Senior Recruiter position. Although I was not actively looking for a change, I had heard a lot about Revolut’s recruitment methodology and was genuinely curious to experience the process firsthand, hoping I could learn something applicable to my current role. However, after going through the interview, I want to share my experience for other candidates, as it was surprisingly disappointing and not what I expected. The interview is extremely structured, standardized, and fast‑paced. While I understand the intention to ensure fairness and consistency, the experience felt overly scripted. Many questions were repeated in almost identical formats, and the interviewer moved through them quickly with very little adaptation to what I was saying. It felt more like completing a checklist than having a professional conversation. I also felt very little active listening or guidance throughout the interview. The focus seemed to be on obtaining numeric, KPI‑driven answers rather than understanding real experience, impact, or context. The pace was rushed, and overall it gave the impression that they were looking for someone who can operate in a highly mechanical, speed‑focused process rather than someone who values a humanized recruitment approach. When I asked questions, the interviewer didn’t elaborate much. I received limited clarity on role expectations, development opportunities, or how the TA function operates internally. From what was explained, the team seems to be strongly segmented, with each person responsible for only one task. For example, recruiters appear to be responsible exclusively for conducting interviews — nothing else. This made the role seem highly repetitive, with very little autonomy, decision‑making, or collaboration. Tools, processes, and daily operations were also not clearly explained. Based on everything shared, the role appears to be highly siloed, with minimal involvement in the broader recruitment cycle. For someone who enjoys full‑cycle ownership, strategic work, or diverse responsibilities, this structure may feel unmotivating and limiting. It left me with the impression that the priority is volume, speed, and strict process compliance rather than impact, expertise, or meaningful contribution. Although the process is undeniably well‑organized and efficient, I personally found it lacked human connection, flexibility, and depth. This made it difficult to showcase my capabilities or assess whether the role would be a meaningful long‑term fit. I do appreciate the professionalism and quick coordination, but overall, I believe the interview experience would benefit greatly from allowing more genuine conversation, providing clearer role context, and making the process feel less automated.

I was initially contacted by a sourcer via LinkedIn, and I decided to move forward in the process because of their professional and effective communication. However, the experience deteriorated significantly after that. During the next stage, the recruiter joined the interview almost 10 minutes late without offering any apology or explanation. Throughout the interview, their attitude was passive-aggressive, at times even bordering on rude. After asking a few general questions, they abruptly informed me that I would advance to the next stage without providing any further details. Following that call, I received a test with a specific deadline. I informed the recruiter that I had a prior travel commitment that would make it impossible to complete the test on time, but they never responded. As a result, I chose to decline continuing in the process. While the sourcer was excellent, their professionalism stood in stark contrast to the rest of the experience, which was very poor. This has left me with a negative impression of the team and the company culture.