I was interviewed for this position and then a week or two later a separate position I applied to (very similar role). Both interview processes were similar. There was a recruiter, and HR Rep, a Hiring Manager for the role, and 1-2 people in the department/team the role would be working in (sometimes a peer, sometimes a manager/dept head). Both went through a progression of staged interviews from Recruiter -> HR -> Hiring Manager -> Team interview, getting more and more involved along the way. There was no technical task given (like a coding assignment, live or otherwise), but there were questions that asked about the level of skill and experience at different tasks, tools, industries, applications, etc. Most of the interview was closer to behavioral questions like "tell us about a time you ..." or "have you ever had to work on a project where ..." and they favor the STAR technique of answering questions. This process was fine. However, my complaints come with how the process was handled after they got their interview completed. Both times I was told to expect to hear something back within a week, either way. The first time I didn't hear back for two weeks, and was told that there was a delay, then a week or so later told there was corporate restructuring occurring, and I would be contacted in a month or so. (I was talking to the Recruiter the whole time... no one else ever contacted me). Then after a month I email to get an update and am told there is still no updates. And a week later I get an email saying they didn't choose to move forward. For the second role, I was wary of this process and so followed up after a week to get updates. Simply never received a response as they said. After 3 weeks I got an automated message that I wasn't being considered. I know it's minor since I did actually get face time for the interview, but it's kind of crappy to just ghost people after giving the impression like this after so many interviews, especially for a role where I'm given the impression that I'm very close to getting the job.

I went through an extensive interview process with Grainger for multiple positions, participating in more than 15 interviews with different team members across several rounds. While many of the interviewers were professional and the conversations themselves were positive, the overall process felt inefficient and poorly coordinated. In several interviews, it appeared that the interviewer had not reviewed my resume beforehand, and a significant portion of the discussion was spent walking through information already clearly listed on my CV. Additionally, some interview questions felt unrelated to the responsibilities of the role I had applied for, which made parts of the process confusing and less productive. After investing a considerable amount of time in the process and receiving positive feedback during several interviews, the communication afterward was disappointing. I experienced long periods without updates and had to follow up with recruiters myself to receive any status updates. Eventually, I received a rejection without any explanation or constructive feedback, despite the significant time commitment involved in the interview process. In at least one or two interviews, I also felt uncomfortable with the tone of the interaction, which gave me the impression that the evaluation might not have been entirely objective. Overall, the experience felt disorganized and not very respectful of candidates’ time, which was surprising given Grainger’s reputation as a large and well-established company.