I applied online. The process took 3 days. I interviewed at THE LISINSKI FIRM in Mar 2025
Interview
The interview process was very fast and well structured. In my case, I first met with the recruiter. She set the tone from the beginning with a very professional and warm approach. She explained the interview flow clearly, asked thoughtful questions, evaluated my experience accurately, and even walked me through her note-taking process during the call so that everything felt transparent and comfortable. It was a great example of how to lead a respectful and well-organized video interview.
Next, I had my interview with the Director of Talent Acquisition. The tone continued consistent. The questions were very focused, and it was clear that they both understood the position deeply and knew exactly what type of profile they were looking for. I felt that I had the space to explain my background in detail, share my ideas, and express my interest in contributing to the mission of the company.
After this second interview, I received clear expectations on the possible next steps. Only a few hours later, the recruiter contacted me again to schedule a quick follow-up call. During that call, she informed me that I had been selected for the position and explained what would happen next. Immediately after our conversation, I received the offer documents along with a clear deadline to review and sign.
From the moment I accepted the offer, I was guided through the preparations for onboarding. I had a direct contact for any questions, and communication was always timely. Any time I needed clarification, either my point of contact or the recruiter helped ensure that everything moved forward smoothly.
Overall, the process was fast, organized, and respectful. I felt informed at every step, and I appreciated how intentional the team was about clarity and candidate experience.
Interview questions [1]
Question 1
One of the questions they asked in my interview was related to how I source and communicate with passive candidates.
For this role, they were looking for someone who could build strong communication strategies, generate interest in opportunities, and identify the right profiles for open positions. So the questions focused on how I search for candidates, how I adapt my messaging depending on the person I’m reaching out to, and how I build rapport and maintain professional communication throughout the process.
Speaking more generally, in the firm’s interview processes (now that I work in Talent Acquisition), the questions are usually designed to understand how a candidate applies their knowledge, skills, and experience in real scenarios. The goal is to see not only what someone has done, but how they think, how they make decisions, and how they would fit within the specific responsibilities of the role.
I applied online. The process took 2 weeks. I interviewed at THE LISINSKI FIRM (Dublin, OH) in Feb 2025
Interview
Clear process and communication between stages. It didn't take more than two weeks so it was consistent and respectful of my time. Questions aligned with the purpose of the role
I applied online. The process took 3 weeks. I interviewed at THE LISINSKI FIRM (Boston, MA) in May 2025
Interview
I applied in April and was contacted by someone from the talent team in early May. The initial conversation was friendly, though it became clear that the details of the role would be better addressed in a followup with someone from the technical side.
The next conversation took place a few days later and was fairly openended. While I appreciated the conversational tone, I found the questions somewhat vague and not entirely aligned with what I'd expect for a leadership-level security role. There seemed to be a disconnect between the actual responsibilities and how they were being described, which made it challenging to fully assess the expectations.
As a candidate with nearly two decades of hands on experience in IT and security leadership, I tried to focus on my ability to adapt across industries, work autonomously and align with various frameworks, even if I haven’t always referred to them by name in previous roles.
My goal was to highlight how real world knowledge, situational problem solving and relationship building often matter more than checking boxes on certifications or buzzwords. Lisinski wants the buzzwords.
During the discussion, I got the sense that there may be a strong emphasis on formality and credentials rather than broader experience and adaptability. Exactly what a seasoned engineer in my entry level years told me one should NOT be, because it's not practical for IT.
There also seemed to be reliance on an external partner to manage much of the technical landscape, while having this person as the overseer? Because it never dawned on them to just have ONE qualified person in house managing all of this. A THOUGHT.
I ultimately didn’t move forward and in retrospect, I think that was for the best. I’ve since accepted an offer that aligns more closely with my leadership philosophy and offers a clearer long term vision, with a smaller company, for more pay. Their loss!
Advice to the Company?
Clarify internal expectations for technical roles, especially those with strategic impact and ensure alignment between interviewers and job descriptions. Experience, adaptability and the ability to grow with evolving needs are just as important as industry specific terminology.
If you interview at this place and don't get selected, don't feel bad, it's not you, it's very much THEM. Yikes!