Interview process consisted of a relatively straightforward phone screener and then a follow-up "onsite" lasting several hours. The onsite interviews were with people in my field, in HR and in business/development. Dress was casual and I was told prior to the onsite that I could dress casually for the interview, although I chose to still look like a professional (which might have been a ding?). The interview with the business leader consisted of some google-type problems to solve, which seemed slightly unusual given that the position I was interviewing for was not a quantitative/numbers role. I happen to have a quantitative background anyway, and was generally well qualified for the role, well connected to the company, and had what I thought were very positive interviews, so I'm not entirely sure why I wasn't a good fit or what they were looking for.

The process starts with a brief telephone screen followed by an invitation for an onsite visit lasting 3-4 hours. HR is extremely friendly, engaging, personable and professional with timing and walking you through the procedure. They did not, however, release names of interviewers prior to walking through the doors. In this instance, the interview is broken down into one-on-one interviews with each member of the department and there was no panel portion or other departments involved. The questions will be based on your background experience and the reason(s) why you would want to work for the company. The selection process boils down to whether you're a personality fit with the department. A majority of the group are experienced, accomplished and bring great personalities/contribute strong teamwork ability to the department's dynamics, however, you'll quickly identify problem areas if you're perceptive. All was quite a positive experience until mid-way through the process when one interviewer threw me for a loop. When asked to explain a complex legal transaction, the tipping point came when the individual repeated the questions, then narrowed them down to requesting very detailed items and steps. This would be typical in a standard interview, unfortunately, the individual began furiously scribbling down notes. It's a 30-45 minute discussion so I found the behavior quite bizarre. It was clear they were not testing my knowledge base and experience, but rather conducting a Q&A to leech experience from an interviewee. Subsequent questions from this particular interviewer ranged from: (1) almost blatantly asking about compensation history; (2) probing for personal opinions on sensitive topics; and (3) questions geared towards deciphering level of seniority achieved in past roles. The interviewer will then proceed to: (1) give minimal to no insight into daily work activities or what exactly they actually contribute to their department and the company as a whole; (2) display strong unwillingness to provide an overview of the department or identify needs and qualities required in a candidate; (3) deflect/avoid providing information on their own qualifications, experience and abilities or lack thereof; (4) critique your answers on the spot; (5) expound on how wonderful it is to work for Riot and how thoroughly spoiled they are by all the perks; and (6) exhibit further lack of tact and time management skills by dragging on an abrasive conversation well beyond the point it should have concluded. Be prepared to answer any and all questions asked in rapid succession in an attempt to poke holes in qualifications and experience. If you provide a vague answer, this interviewer will press on with slightly altered tactics. The interviewer's intent became transparent very early on. Lastly, another interviewer decided not to show up! It would be great if the department considered changing their interview format to a panel discussion for future candidates. LoL.