I'll start by saying that I would not be writing this review if I had gotten the offer. Anyway, before knowing the result I did have the feeling that the process had been non-standard (soft term for weird). When you as a candidate leave an interview with no clue on how to assess your performance, then most likely there is an issue with the questions. The role is essentially technical (I made sure to clarify this with the interviewers), although it implies work on customers' premises (technical work I mean). The technical questions implied little coding and a bit of network design. When it comes to the soft skills evaluation, it seemed that the interviewers had nothing prepared, just 1-on-1 meetings speaking about my past experience, about what the role requires, etc. so I ended up answering the same questions 3 or 4 times. Tip: if the role is about soft skills like communication or ability to give presentations, a good exercise would be to have the candidate present some of their past projects, or give them some business-related material in advance, and get them present it during the on-site session. Then the interviewers could ask questions 'with focus' on the topic being presented. Tip for phone interview: use some advanced tool for code sharing like codeshare.io, not just Google docs. All in all, I think the process was too vague for a role which is implicitly vague (as they understand it). It felt like a PR person without any technical background could have gotten the position before me.

There was a thorough and technical skills test interview that was formatted like a written exam. The interview was a full day in length and I got to meet a lot of different people from upper management to various engineers. They took me out for lunch as part of the interview and I also received a tour of the office.