Edwards interview questions

I applied to Internal Communications, got invited for an office/factory tour (where the country manager +1 literally showed me every room there) and was scheduled in for a second visit where I would make a presentation. During the tour, I felt that the role was very much an Executive Assistant role, and indeed, when I received resources to create the presentation, it said the role was EA. How did I end up applying for this sort of role, originally titled Internal Comms, and why is a presentation required for an EA role? When I went again, the vibes had totally changed, everyone seemed very aloof aside from Magazine with the big English language complex, who I would assume played an instrumental part for it to be like this. In the end, they stole a lot of ideas from my presentation, had to undergo yet another interview disguised as a 'Q&A,' and then booted out in because they have other candidates to vet. The procedure was so bizarre, Edwards Japan is delusional (you guys are based in suburbia, not the CBD), and the company culture won't change - essentially, what you're doing is a lost cause. What a waste of time knowing the company and every room that exists in their office.

I rarely leave reviews, but this process was sufficiently disjointed to warrant comment particularly for a role positioned at a senior, global level reporting into a "Vice President". The recruitment experience began on an uncertain footing and never really recovered. Communication was handled by an overseas Recruiter whose command of English was, at best, functional. While one can appreciate the global nature of the business, clarity and professionalism in candidate communication are basic expectations especially for leadership hires. The tone and structure of correspondence gave the impression of a process lacking rigour. The interview itself did little to restore confidence. It was conducted by a single interviewer on teams sitting in their (designer) kitchen, which is unusual for a role of this scope and seniority. Typically, one would expect at least a two-person structure to ensure balance and proper assessment. Instead, this was framed as an “informal chat,” which might be acceptable at an early screening stage but not when candidates have been shortlisted from what was described as a pool of many applicants. More concerning was the apparent lack of preparation. The interviewer openly acknowledged they had not reviewed my CV in advance, which is difficult to reconcile with any credible selection process. There also seemed to be a fundamental misunderstanding of what a Career Interim Manager does which is hardly an obscure concept at this level. This resulted in a conversation that felt superficial and, frankly, misaligned with the requirements of the role. Post interview communication was equally poor. I was advised I would receive feedback within three weeks, accounting for the interviewer’s holiday. In reality, there was no proactive follow-up whatsoever. I only received an update after chasing for clarity well beyond the indicated timeframe. For a business of this scale, such a lack of candidate care is disappointing. Finally, the transparency of the process is questionable. It was suggested that “a few” candidates would progress to a second round. In reality, it appears only one individual was advanced and subsequently offered the role. This directly contradicts what was communicated and undermines trust in the integrity of the process. In summary, the experience reflected a lack of preparation, poor communication, and questionable process management. For a global organisation, one would expect significantly higher standards, particularly when engaging experienced candidates for senior positions.