A recruiter reached out to me via LinkedIn, and I decided to apply after I had a 1:1 with them where they explained to me more about the role and what would be required. The interview process was a standard 3 rounds - an initial HR screening (1hr), a panel interview with two associate VPs (1hr), and a 1:1 with the lead executive (30 min.) that the executive mentioned was pretty much the last step in the interview process. In-between the initial screening and the panel interview, there was a case study which I had to prepare a short written insert and a presentation for a hypothetical situation. This case study was presented at the beginning of the panel interview. The process was fairly smooth, but halfway through the interview following the HR screening, I was left in the dark for around 4 weeks (I assumed I got ghosted at first) and the role that I applied for changed titles and salary range. I was able to get clarification as to why this happened when I brought it up in my interviews, but there was not a direct acknowledgement from HR that this happened. In the end, I was not extended an offer, which they communicated fairly promptly, but I wonder if they just hire on a rolling basis since the position was still up even at the end of the interview process. All-in-all, it was a standard hiring process and the case interview wasn't too bad, but the role change in the middle left some confusion.

The interview process felt highly subjective and somewhat difficult to navigate. While some conversations were positive, one interview in particular felt more focused on abstract communication style and interpretation rather than practical experience, strategic thinking, or transferable leadership capability. The questions were often vague, and despite having significant experience it was difficult to determine what the interviewer was specifically looking for in responses. At times, the interaction felt more evaluative of presentation style than actual substance or business impact. Overall, the process left me feeling that alignment and communication style weighed more heavily than demonstrated capability or depth of experience.