The interview was intensive, there were three interviews in total, all the way to the final interview. I'll give my account here:
The first interview consisted of the main Group Lead and one of the recent Tech folks. This is to assess whether the next rounds are needed.
What then followed is a talent score exam, questions were scenarios within the company and what your response would be to them, it was online. Personality test was PAPI-3. Questions phrased around 'how do you handle a situation where your deadline is cut short'.
The second interview consisted of a technical round with two people, and questions were asked from statistics and programming. There was only one passive-aggressive person, and you should be able to handle it. There is always that one person.
The third interview was the final interview where the Group Lead and another leader would interview you. Lots of technical questions, a presentation. Very well-mannered folks here, and very good questions asked.
I received a mixed, misleading response eventually. They said that I'd be good for ASML, but in a different department, and should be interviewing there. The feedback they then gave me was quite surprising, and quite contrary to my skills, and I certainly questioned it.
The outcome, which was a middle-way verdict (neither selected nor rejected), was misleading. The suggestion of a Group Lead in one department is irrelevant and should have been made more clear. This is because the moment I applied to their suggested group, I received a rejection. I have made this experience clear to my interviewer. I hope that this practice is avoided.
