Hope you have time to spare, they clearly do. I’m not going to moan about the fact that I didn’t get an offer. There are plenty of reasons it doesn’t happen, wrong skill set, experience mismatch, poor fit for the team/company culture, etc. What happened here was instead a very long, confusing, and frankly capricious interview process. End to end it took over a month. Two phone screens, two in person interviews, all 4 with positive feedback. I was then told by my recruiter that the CEO wanted to meet with me, but was on vacation and wouldn’t be back for two weeks. Two weeks??? Will anyone even remember who I am in two weeks? I was already over two weeks into their process to begin with. So two weeks go by and I meet with him. Friendly enough guy but then he gets into these odd behavioral questions, wants to see “how you respond.” Asks you the capital of Canada and then explains why most people get it wrong. The whole time I’m thinking... 1. How is this question being used to determine skill at my job. 2. Even if it does relate, how does the CEO have time to be asking these kind of questions? Typically behavioral and problem solving questions are handled by departmental/team leads who will actually be working with you. So again, get good feedback from the recruiter. Another couple days roll by and they want to meet....again....but it’s not an interview they say. They ask to meet on Thursday but I had an all day meeting. Offer multiple other times we can meet. Best they can do is the following week Tuesday. So next Monday rolls around and I get a call from my recruiter. They’re not interested. Said they were ready to make an offer last Thursday but decided against it because I was unable to make the meeting. Also that I didn’t have enough experience for the position. So on Thursday I was good enough for an offer, but Monday I suddenly became too inexperienced. Furthermore, what would induce a hiring manager to toss out an offer based purely on whether someone is able to make a “non interview” meeting. I can only guess that something changed internally, perhaps they found a better candidate. Or maybe they weren’t exactly sure what they needed in the first place. But to blame it on me for the meeting was a pretty sorry excuse. It mirrors other reviews from ex employees regarding management being unwilling to recognize and admit fault. The number 1 complaint from people who left the company is non-competitive pay. Coupled with the fact that my interview experience seems fairly in line with their norm. I, like others, am speculating that they are seeking the desperate. People who will work long for little. This interview process is an endurance test, see how much you’ll put up with. I’m not mad I got turned down. I’m mad they wasted so much of my time. Strung me along for weeks only to get turned down over something very silly. Save your time and apply elsewhere... unless you’re really desperate.