The interview started with the hiring manager, and moved progressively upward in the chain of command. Working through a recruiter, feedback from the agency after the first interview was that I was technically proficient, but was not exhibiting the energy level they had hoped for. Adjusting appropriately and mirroring the energy and enthusiasm put forth by my interviewers, I proceeded through two more interviews. Ultimately the same feedback came back in that I was well qualified for the job, but was not as enthusiastic as they were hoping for. Several things struck me as odd about this. My first interview was well over an hour, the second interview ran 15 minutes longer than originally scheduled, and my final interview with the big boss found me bewildered as he could not stay engaged. His latent thoughts about a pending conference call and his bad feelings over employees trashing his office for his birthday clouded his concentration. Bad days, we all have them, but you have to move on. Ultimately I was not offered the position based on my lack of perceived energy. What really struck me about this is that this office has a staff of approximately 50 people in a fairly confined environment, but you would be hard pressed as a visitor to confidently say that there was anybody occupying the office. With that said, I was left with the impression that the management team was not on the same page as to what they were looking for. Rather than three different interviews, the members of the management team would be better serviced by conducting a team interview and addressing their concerns upfront rather than after the fact with their recruiter. Props for having the hiring manager make the first interview strike, but points off for scheduling follow-up interviews on days where obvious distractions will take away from the process. It is a disservice to the company and unfair to the candidates. Good company that needs some help in a few areas.