Very unusual interview process based on my experience with UK companies - makes sense since they're in the USA I suppose. There were tests to be taken before the first interview stage. One was a personality test involving picking words from a group of about 80 to describe how you think you should act at work, things like "thoughtful" "decisive" "forceful" etc then asked which of those words you thought applied to you. Second was a problem solving test which felt just like an online IQ test. I didn't feel like either of these tests would give any concrete results on anything so I'm not sure why their HR bothers with them. The first interview stage was basics like where do you live, why do you want to work for us, why are you leaving your current job. They also administered a hypothetical scenario where a user can't get to a website on their laptop. Odd choice of test when this is a project role not a first line support role but I suppose something has to filter out the non-technical applicants. The second stage of the process was a three HOUR long session. This is insulting quite frankly and the company really needs to change it, especially when it very cleanly divides into two parts that could be administered separately. The timezone difference meant I could schedule it for the evening my time but otherwise I would've had to take a half day off of my current job just to attend, the lack of respect for the applicant's time really put me off. First part was an hour of three further quizzes on networking, active directory, and Microsoft 365. Relevant subjects but some of the questions were pretty academic, like giving the definition for what a network is or what Active Directory does. Second part was a rundown of the role in detail then two technical scenarios - one for troubleshooting an inaccessible website on a lab machine they remoted me into (the same scenario as in the previous stage you may have noticed), then a role play on troubleshooting internet connectivity on a machine due to a server problem. These sounded fine on paper but again this was a project engineer role, not first/second line tech support, so I didn't feel like any part of this interview would've distinguished between a good or bad person for that role. Overall this was a needlessly demanding interview experience even though no part of it was technically advanced, and while the offered salary was competitive - above average even - it reflected poorly on the company itself. Questions on the tasks they said the job actually involved like 365 migrations, configuring AAD connect, managing Intune etc would've been a much better use of both of our time.