When I applied I had emailed the hiring manager too. I applied around November, and heard back from hiring manager in January. It went well. Recruiter called me 2 weeks after that. And I immediately had to fill out the candidate questionare after that. A week later, someone contacted me to plan the on site interviews. It was actually 4 weeks from then because of other scientist's availability. Onsite interview started with my research seminar. They asked a lot of questions, some a little difficult. But they were all very intelligent questions. Executive director and director of the department was present for the meeting. Then I had one on one meeting with senior scientists, principal scientists and the directors. Lunch with lab members and back to more one on one meetings. I enjoyed talking to them. They asked about some behavioral questions but mostly about my experiences and future plans. What are the skills I want to develop etc. at the end of the interview, the hiring manager asked me to send recommendations. And my advisor got a request a week later. And another week until I was selected (mostly because I followed up a lot because I received a competing offer).

The process is more rigorous and scientific rigor is appreciated. You will have a phone interview followed by on-site interview for a day or two. You will give technical seminar followed by one-on-one interviews.

It was just funny. Throughout the entire interview they kept talking non-stop and didn't give me much chance to speak. I mean, wasn't I the one being interviewed? Instead of asking me questions, he kept emphasizing how messy their data is, how unsolvable their problems are, and how boring the papers they want to publish are. Was this an interview or a discouragement session? Oh, I get it now, a postdoc salary around San Fran is only $75,000. Even he can't stand it, so he's trying to discourage me as an act of kindness. Man, it's really a good deed. I'm about to cry my eyes out.