Process was essentially four parts: the first part with the internal talent manager, then an interview with the hiring manager, third part was with the peers I would be working with, where the process went off the rails The first interview was well-structured and professional, giving me confidence in the company’s recruitment standards. However, the second-round experience was notably different and less consistent in approach and preparation. During the interview, I was asked about formal performance management, rather than coaching, which are two distinct areas. My response therefore focused on procedural performance management — ensuring fairness, compliance, and mitigating risk — which would be appropriate in a Fair Work context. The interviewers appeared somewhat unprepared and lacked clarity in their questioning. The questions asked were quite general and more suited to an entry-level or mid-level role, rather than a leadership position. Incorporating behavioural-based questions would have provided a better framework to assess experience, leadership style, and competency. I also noted that when I offered to clarify or expand on responses, the opportunity to engage in deeper discussion wasn’t taken. This made it difficult to showcase relevant examples or align experience to what they were seeking. Overall, while the opportunity to interview was appreciated, the second stage didn’t reflect the same level of professionalism or investment as the initial round. A more consistent, structured, and senior-level interview process would greatly improve the candidate experience and allow for more meaningful evaluation on both sides.