The application and process leading up to an interview was cumbersome, inhumane, and included ethical concerns about proprietary materials. The application required two writing samples. They required a project summary to qualify for the next round. Next was an operational process redesign with change management strategy using a provided data set with four separate deliverables which would've cost $1500 worth of work on the low end. When that was acceptable an interview was granted but required three additional 'real' work products from past employers or clients. When ethical concerns about sharing confidential proprietary materials were raised they held to the requirement but allowed for identifiable information to be redacted. After ten separate artifacts were submitted and approved they then offered an interview which was the first human interaction by voice or video in the process. The interviewers were professional and pleasant. They noted multiple times a strict policy against providing feedback of any kind to candidates during or after the process. They were also not forthcoming when information about the process, timelines, or details about the candidate process were asked. It was an opaque and cold experience in direct conflict with the organizational culture and values described in their public facing materials.
