Oyster interview questions

The interview process lasted approximately 2.5 months across five rounds and ultimately felt far more disorganized and one-sided than thoughtful. The process included: 1) Recruiter screen 2) Hiring manager interview 3) Team interview 4) Case study assignment 5) Final case study presentation Note: Candidates should clarify compensation expectations immediately. During the very first recruiter conversation, I was told my salary expectations were above their target range, but that they may be able to “stretch for the right candidate.” Given the amount of unpaid work expected throughout the process, this should have been resolved upfront rather than carried through months of interviews. The case study process was the clearest red flag. Candidates are expected to: *complete an unnessarily complex strategic assignment, *submit a PDF presentation, *record a self-guided presentation video, *and then present the same material live. The assignment itself was absurdly broad and realistically should have been several separate case studies. At the same time, candidates were instructed to limit the presentation to 5 slides, making the expectations contradictory from the start. As you can see from the case study I posted below in the questions section, merely reading the questions out loud would take 5+ minutes although they asked that the entire video be 1 to 2 minutes. The most concerning part was that some interviewers in the final round did not appear to have meaningful expertise in the actual function being evaluated. This became obvious during the discussion itself and made the exercise feel performative rather than substantive. The company also appears to be going through ongoing organizational instability and repeated restructures/layoffs, which in hindsight (probably?) explains some of the disconnect throughout the process. There seemed to be a lack of alignment around what the role actually required, how success would be measured, and how senior candidates should be evaluated. Communication throughout the process also needs improvement. There were long delays between rounds, minimal proactive updates, and after the final presentation I was effectively ghosted for roughly two weeks until I followed up myself. Only *then* did I receive a generic rejection email with feedback that did not meaningfully align with either my background or the presentation itself. By the end of the process, it became difficult to avoid the impression that the company does not have a particularly clear understanding of the role, the function, or how to properly evaluate senior candidates within it. The individuals I met with during earlier rounds were thoughtful, engaged, and pleasant. Everyone mentioned the chaotic environment, so they were very transparent about the current org (mis)behavior. Unfortunately, the overall process itself was one of the more poorly structured interview experiences I’ve been a part of in 10+ years of interviewing for senior level positions.

the process was clear and short. the steps were described in the first interview with HR. the team was respectful and they gave me full feedback of why I did not continue in the process.