I interviewed for a UX/UI role in London and found the early stages extremely positive, but the overall process ended up feeling inconsistent and ultimately disappointing. The first interview was a call with a staff member based in Canada, and it was a genuinely great experience. They clearly explained the role, interview structure, and next steps. The second interview was in person in London, where I met a senior designer and presented my portfolio. This was another very positive stage — the conversation flowed well, we connected over design approaches, learning opportunities, and upcoming client work, and it felt like a strong mutual fit. The third stage was a take-home task. This part felt quite disconnected from the job expectations: the brief seemed more like an internal component exercise rather than something representative of the strategic thinking, discovery, or practical UX/UI processes that the role would require. It didn’t feel reflective of the time and effort a designer needs to put into such an assessment. The final stage was an in-person interview with the CEO. This was where I learned more about the company’s culture, opportunities to collaborate with developers and other designers, and long-term vision. I was also given an office tour, which naturally gave the impression that things were moving in a good direction. Unfortunately, after this multi-stage process and a significant time investment and travel, I received a generic rejection email. I was told it came down to myself and one other candidate, but the role continues to be reposted frequently online, which was disappointing and felt misaligned with what was communicated. I would recommend that the company review their interview process to ensure clearer communication, better alignment between stages, and a more representative task. Given the time commitment required, a more personalised and transparent outcome would make a big difference for candidates.