The interview process involved 4 stages. An initial 30 minute screening with senior technology leadership, two 90 minute interviews, one being a scenario-based technical interview added later in the process, and a final 30 minute conversation with Operations leadership. The interviewers themselves were professional, knowledgeable, and very clearly invested in finding the right person. The conversations were thoughtful and at times, very open about the challenges the organisation is working through. However, the overall process felt less structured than expected, with elements evolving late in the process. An additional technical interview was introduced after several stages had already been completed, and during that interview it became apparent that the rationale for this step had not been communicated beforehand. The interviewers themselves expressed surprise at this and acknowledged that it highlighted internal process issues. Across several stages, interviews also consistently overran or ended abruptly due to time constraints, which meant there was limited opportunity for the me to ask questions or carry out my own due diligence. As a result, the process felt one-sided, with a laser-focus on assessing my experience but leaving me little space to explore the organisation in any depth. What went well: • Interviewers were engaged and transparent about organisational challenges • Interviewers were open and willing to discuss areas for improvement What could be improved: • Earlier alignment and clearer communication on the level of technical leadership required • Better coordination and ownership of the interview process when additional stages are introduced • Ensuring interviews are properly time-boxed to allow for two-way discussion and candidate questions Overall, this felt like a well-intentioned process that would benefit from tighter structure, clearer upfront expectations, and a more balanced interview dynamic. With these improvements, the experience for candidates could be significantly stronger.