I interviewed at PGT Partners. The process stretched over several months with only a handful of rounds, but there were long gaps between stages and very limited updates. It began with an automated rejection stating I did not meet the requirements; after I queried this—because my experience closely matched the brief—I was sent a technical assessment and then invited to speak with people from different departments in each round. I was told typically candidates may meet a dozen or more people during the entire interview process; I met around half a dozen. Eventually, after about a month from last round, I was told I was sort of overqualified for the role. Early on I was asked for my last salary and expectations. When I asked for the salary range, I was told it would be “competitive” and aligned to my last role, but no banding was shared. Some interviewers were candid and courteous, and I appreciated their honesty about the work culture and ways of working. However, the overall experience felt drawn-out and opaque, with shifting signals from the initial automated rejection to the final decision—feedback that could have been identified much earlier. Advice to management: Publish a clear interview plan upfront (stages, participants, indicative timelines) and stick to it. Share salary bands early so both sides can make informed decisions. Provide specific, timely feedback—flag seniority fit after the first review, not months in. Maintain consistent communication between rounds; brief updates make a big difference. Align the process with an entrepreneurial positioning: structured, transparent, and decisive.