I had a relatively long interview process, with five interviews in all over a period of about 4 months. The reasons for this are understandable, as I am a qualified solicitor with 10 years post qualification litigation experience, with no knowledge of microprocessors or qualifications in computer science, but I was looking to do something entirely different. The process took the usual form, in that I was first screened by the HR team to discuss my interest in the job and the reasons for leaving a legal career. About a month later I was invited to undertake a further telephone interview with an emailed writing test. This was not too taxing given my experience of drafting documentation. A few days after completing the writing tests I was invited to attend a technical interview. I was concerned that this is where I would become unstuck given my complete lack of experience. I was interviewed, via telephone, by two of the team. I was asked to review documents that were emailed to me during the interview and answer questions on them. The documents were not difficult to understand, and if you read the text that surrounded the diagrams the answers to the questions being asked were not difficult to arrive at. Following that interview I was screened by HR again, and I was invited to a face to face interview at the head office in Cambridge. This interview took the form of two sessions before two panels. The first was a second technical interview with a Principal Engineer and an Architect. The second panel were two senior technical authors. The first panel understood that I did not have any technical experience or qualifications, but were looking to exploit my experience with documentation and drafting abilities. This interview was not "technical" at all. The second panel asked questions about my experience of drafting documents for differing audiences, something I was comfortably able to demonstrate.