I interviewed for a senior role and based on the number of rounds and expectations, anticipated a structured and professional experience. Instead, the process revealed several concerning behaviours at the leadership level that senior candidates should be aware of. The panel required two detailed 15-minute presentations one of which was comparing their proprietary solutions (an unusual and unrealistic task for an external candidate without domain context). This kind of assessment is more appropriate for internal applicants or individuals with prior experience in the specific product ecosystem. It signalled a lack of clarity about how to evaluate external talent. Upon joining the final interview, I encountered a panel that did not introduce themselves, offer a greeting, or acknowledge my presence beyond a curt “hello.” As someone who has run many hiring processes, I consider this a basic standard of professionalism. The absence of even minimal courtesy was surprising. Throughout the session, the tone from certain senior panelists was dismissive and unnecessarily adversarial. At one point, after I requested clarification on a question, the department head responded with, “Let me make this really simple for you.” This is not how effective leaders communicate nor how high-performing teams attract talent. Despite the hiring manager previously stating that deep technical expertise was not required, the final panel focused exclusively on highly technical questioning. There was no exploration of leadership competencies, stakeholder collaboration, communication ability, or delivery experience which are typically central to senior roles. This disconnect suggests internal misalignment and unclear expectations. Additionally, the interpersonal dynamic among the interviewers was noticeably strained. Candidates can usually detect when something is amiss within a leadership team, and that was certainly the case here. The atmosphere felt tense and disjointed. Following the interview, I sent a professional thank-you note to the hiring manager and received no acknowledgement. As a principle, I always assume people are doing their best and that interviewers want candidates to succeed. However, the tone and questioning style from parts of the panel gave the opposite impression. It felt less like an evaluation of capabilities and more like an attempt to catch me out. This “gotcha” dynamic is counterproductive and inconsistent with high-trust, collaborative leadership cultures. In my view, the interview process reflected deeper organisational issues namely, a lack of emotional intelligence at the leadership level, inconsistent expectations, and poor coordination across teams. These behaviours often translate directly into the day-to-day culture. Pros: - Recruiter was friendly and responsive - Process was clearly scheduled and well-organised administratively Cons: - Leadership panel demonstrated dismissive and condescending communication - No alignment on role expectations between interview rounds - Interview environment lacked professionalism and psychological safety - Unrealistic technical expectations for external candidates - Poor internal dynamic observed within the panel - Lack of basic courtesy and follow-through

Just 2 steps, one with the hiring manager and one with the Senior Leadership. Interview questions was based on previous work experience, org behaviour, situational leadership etc. Good prep is the key to crack the interviews, use the STAR approach to respond.

The process was smooth overall but long. HR interaction, hiring manager interview, regional director interview, MD interview and finally Senior MD interview. Personally, it was a great way to interact with several stakeholders and understand the culture of the organization.