1) About 35-40% of the interviewers started their questioning by saying "I will only need 20 minutes for this", while emphasizing it is an important leadership position that they are hiring for. So 20 minutes is all needed to identify "important, critical leaders"? What a strange thing to say - also a GREAT way to make candidates feel important and wanted!
2) There is significant shuffling of interviewers and schedules. One almost has to be on-call to be able to react quickly.
3) For an engineering manager position, I only interviewed with only technical person. To me it hints that Engineering MoM is not a very technical position.
4) Of all the people I spoke to, the hiring manager was the one I spoke the least with. The phone screen was one of the "I only need 20 minutes for this" calls. The other one was quite amusing, and is described below.
5) After the loop was done, the recruiter called me to congratulate me on passing, and started discussing details of the offer, including sending me a document described the equity program. Recruiter mentioned that the hiring manager would be calling me to discuss the position next.
6) SURPRISE INTERVIEW! I get a call from the hiring manager, he congratulates me on passing the loop, then as I prepare to ask questions about the role, he again says "I need to ask you two questions and need 20 minutes for this". Then proceeds to ask two random questions about platforms and process enforcement, then hangs up the call after I answer. Tells me he'd be calling in a week to discuss the position.
7) I get asked for references.
8) After passing the loop, have the recruiter discuss some details of the offer, have the hiring manager tell me they'd be calling me after a week, I get ghosted for about 3.5 weeks. References are contacted and feedback is confirmed positive.
9) I ping the recruiter to see when the offer is coming - it's not coming. They chose another candidate. I am fine with it, even after being offered verbally, but the ghosting part after wasting so much of my time seems almost intentional.
10) I call up a senior leader in the office I applied to, an acquaintance of mine. His answer: "don't come. It's a mess and a revolving door of people". I was shocked with the response.
11) I get called by the recruiter saying that another director saw my feedback and is very interested in talking to me and do an interview loop.
Guess I'm not joining, then.
I am ok with passing loops, being rejected, I've seen it all. But being ghosted after acceptance is a first. What a bizarre place this is.
Part of that is understandable. They probably didn’t do a great job interviewing you. It’s probably exasperating.
But I can’t imagine someone who gets so easily frustrated writing about an interview would be great to work with. Because you could’ve just as easily criticized the interview process without bringing the exasperated tone along the way. With clarity and a measured response. But you wear your heart on your sleeve and it’s one of clear annoyance.
Is it? To me it reads just like a blow-by-blow description of the situation. There is almost no personal commentary, other than a couple that aim (and probably fail) at being funny. But to each his/her own, I guess.