Unforgettable - Approached on linkedin by an external recruiter - Online interview with external recruiter - Online interview with team lead - Written contact with company recruiter - Written technical challenge - Online interview with company recruiter - 2-stage in-person interview for 2 hours. Part i) Team Lead + team member ii) Director The online interviews were fairly standard, I would say by the end of the meeting with the team lead it was clear that my skills and experience weren't sufficiently aligned with what they expect for the role. Fine, that's the purpose of an interview. They would let me know if something comes up. That's the feedback I gave to the internal recruiter who followed up and asked how the interview went. A few weeks later I hear back from the internal recruiter, something has come up in the same team and that I would be an "incredible" fit. Please complete the technical challenge to progress. This was a set of four technical problems to solve, and one request to show prior work. Only two questions would be evaluated, but all five should be completed, and a preference expressed for the 'best' answers. A few weeks after submitting the technical challenge I had a call with the internal recruiter, who said that the feedback given by the team lead was "fairly positive". Therefore, to progress I am invited for an in-person interview at their offices in Espoo/Helsinki. Flights, transfers, accommodation and breakfast will be paid for by the company. I attended the interview in Espoo, having taken two days out of my schedule for the round trip. The hotel provided was a modern apart-hotel, conveniently located adjacent to the offices. I gather this is the hotel that new starters typically stay in after relocating to Finland. Part i) of the interview was a friendly, i'd say solution oriented, interview. The secretary hadn't booked a meeting room, so I had an early tour of the office (not a bad thing). We we're able to discuss what were the general needs for the team, the general approach and structure of the day. However, it still wasn't clear what they actually needed. I had the impression that the team was a newly formed branch of another team, in part due their rapid growth. Therefore, the roles and responsibilities of the team we're fluid. The team lead mentioned the words "internal politics" in the interview. Willingness to perform overtime was expressed as an important pre-requisite during the interview. Part ii) of the interview was a one-one. It was performed in a cramped break-out room with a small coffee table. Laptop placed on the coffee table between myself and the director. I had the impression that the director didn't read my CV until perhaps 2 minutes before the interview. It wasn't a conservation. Rather, I was being talked to. A few highlights: - [INTERVIEWER] I see you've worked for quite some time at X. I have friends who have worked at X. They have told me that progress is slow at x. We work rapidly here. How will you reconcile the difference? - [INTERVIEWER] What is the difference between a staff engineer and a junior/senior engineer? - [INTERVIEWER] In Finland it's cold, and the people are not like the rest of the nordic countries. Are you sure about this? - [INTERVIEWER] ...colleagues are friends. One big family etc etc. - [ME] What is the typical career development trajectory at the company? [INTERVIEWER]..... Here we focus on impact and ability (visibility) not number of years experience. Example: I manage someone with 20 years experience, he gets paid less than another brilliant guy with 4 years experience because he has greater impact. What also became apparent in the interview was that the technical challenge will be used to assess the position on the pay-scale. The director said that the interview with him would be used to confirm that positioning. After that an engineer gave me a tour of the assembly facility.