I applied for the role of Documentation Editor at Vestas and was left frustrated by the recruitment process. After submitting my application, it took two weeks to receive any update, which already felt unnecessarily slow. When I was finally contacted, the process involved a pre-recorded video interview via HireVue, which felt impersonal and one-sided. There was no opportunity for a real conversation, follow-up, or meaningful discussion about my qualifications. What struck me most was the feedback I eventually received: that my profile was “too scientific” for the role. This explanation seemed poorly thought out and inconsistent with the nature of the position. A documentation editor typically benefits from scientific rigor, analytical thinking, and attention to detail—skills I have demonstrated throughout my academic and professional career. It also seemed clear that my CV had not been thoroughly reviewed prior to the interview, as a careful look at my background would have clarified my suitability for the role. Overall, the process came across as poorly organized and lacking transparency. There was no substantive feedback or acknowledgment of the effort and time candidates invest in applying. A simple, direct email rejection would have been far more professional and respectful of applicants’ time. While Vestas may have capable teams, the recruitment experience suggested a lack of preparation, meaningful candidate engagement, and logical communication. Future applicants should be aware that the process may be time-consuming and may not provide constructive feedback.