I was reached out a recruiter, then I had to call their HR rep. They didn't call me, I had to call them. Very bizarre and abnormal to see that. I digress, but after that 30 minute call, I had an hour teams meeting with the direct hiring manager. That went well, then they wanted to schedule 3 more hours of teams meetings with multiple people. Honestly this why I have to give a negative experience, and I will explain why. For starters they wanted I, a person who is already employed which is very common in this market and to get many interviews, to take 3 hours out of my workday to talk to six people. Then the first real red flag came up. They emailed me how it had to be this week on a Tuesday afternoon. This is the same week I was going to be traveling on Thursday and Friday, and wasn't going to be available at all until next week. Especially for three hours, or eventually splitting it up into 90 min sessions. Then they did the passive aggressive threat how they have to move quickly and the position might be gone next week. I told them in a polite business manner of whatever, get back to me if you still want too. Guess what, they did and act like nothing happen. That passive aggressive nonsense where you have to act now like a shady salesman is a red flag to me. I interviewed with 6 people. The Product Management team made sense since one would be a fellow co-worker who I would be trained by, or work with in regards to multiple elements crossing both product platforms. Then the director of the department was an interviewer as well, which again makes sense. Those were good interviews and good questions. Then the last notable person that made sense was tied to the client and payment side that would be heavily involved as a stakeholder in their new product. Perfectly fine. It was a little short since she didn't have many questions, and mine were answered quickly. Nothing wrong with that. Then the other 90 minutes was with the development and scrum team, and each one was clear how we may never work together. Then why are you here? One tried to give a half baked answer how we have to run through this to see if you have the chops for the role. I'm like what did he say. Have the chops? Then get someone who is going to be assigned, or maybe the head of the dev team who will be a stakeholder. He will have questions, and vice versa from me, on what the process is and how he will be tied to the product. Instead it's three people who I may never speak to if I was working there. Why waste yours, and even worse, my time? When you can't answer my questions related to understanding the product you are trying to build because you got random people interviewing me, you have lost the plot. Especially when one was struggled to ask a good question since he had to keep rewording it since he didn't like my answer since he didn't know how to ask his question. Again, a clear sign that you shouldn't be here unless you will be assign to the product and have some relevant information tied to the interview. Instead it was a broad question where you only want to hear what you want to hear. Furthermore, there are a couple more red flags. For starters as I interviewed and got as much information as possible, they were advertising this job as a mid-level product manager role. In reality they want you run this entire new and large product that is a core of their business as the final decision maker. Sorry, that isn't a mid-level role. That is a Senior or director level role. Especially since this product was going to be a core of their business moving forward. Not a smaller or secondary product, but a core product. It's like getting if Microsoft hired a guy with 5-6 years of PM experience to run Windows moving forward. It sounds like they are underestimating what they need for this role, and I can say that from personal experience as an associate on a major product that was a top priority for the company. I understand the scale to an extent, they were underestimating what they need. Unless they are hoping to underpay someone. The final red flags which ties to the amount of interviews and time I had to spend, it seems like they love meetings. I had a couple people late since they were coming from a meeting, and had a meeting afterwards as well. Because of that, a couple, just a couple, seem ill prepared on what to ask. I think meetings are useful, but can also be a waste of time. Considering how long these interviews are, and how often they reworded the same questions, it feels like they have too many meetings and not a set agenda to keep things moving in a proficient matter. Again, my opinion, but interviews are design to give you a sense what they are thinking and how they run things. Overall it felt like an inefficient company where restructuring is occurring, not understanding what they need, inefficient time management, and likely issues moving forward.