It's been a while I had the opportunity to speak with Suzanne regarding a potential position, and I would like to share some professional feedback on my experience. Based on Suzanne’s LinkedIn profile, it appears she has several years of experience in recruitment. With that background, I expected candidate engagement to reflect a consistently high standard of professionalism throughout the process. However, certain aspects of our interaction were surprising. In particular, I was asked about the origin of my accent and where I live. Such questions are not relevant to a professional assessment of suitability for a role and could reasonably be perceived as inappropriate in a recruitment context. I was also concerned by the structure of the process. After an initial telephone conversation covering key aspects of the role and my background, I was invited to participate in a subsequent video call that revisited essentially the same points. As this second discussion covered matters we had already addressed, it felt repetitive and, ultimately, a poor use of both my time and, potentially, the hiring team’s time. In a competitive job market, and for the benefit of both candidates and clients, recruitment conversations should be efficient and clearly differentiated in purpose. Following our discussions, I was informed that my details would be passed on to the hiring team and that Suzanne was impressed with my experience. However, despite following up to enquire about next steps, I have not received any response or update. In the current job market, I believe it is the minimum standard of professional courtesy to communicate whether a candidate’s application will progress, rather than leaving them without closure. I share this feedback constructively, with the intention of contributing to an improved candidate experience and greater clarity in engagement going forward.