I was initially contacted by a recruiter for a Data Engineering position, who then set up a tech screen (coderpad). The manager who administered the tech screen provided some feedback that I would probably also be interested in working on another team (it was very unclear what that meant). The result was that the recruiter had the Analytics organization reach out to me about an additional BI role; the initial recruiter stopped talking to me altogether with no communication as to why. I was then asked to take another phone screen with a manager in the BI space. This was not a proper tech screen but more of a discussion about technical experience. Eventually I was contacted again and invited for an on-site interview. The on-site had three rounds and about 3-4 hours in total. The first round I met with one of the directors in the Analytics organization; this was more or less a standard behavioral interview. In the second round I met with two people at the same time. They provided the 9-step model mentioned in other reviews. They gave me 25 minutes to work through the model on my own and then explain it to them when they return. Realistically this means providing the mathematical explanations to each step and also translating that into real-world importance. In my experience this is not task representative of typical BI work and I struggle to see the value posing this challenge. The final round was a set of math problems related to marketing campaign value. The math was basic algebra. At the end of the interview I was told I would have feedback in about 1 day. 4 business days later I followed up with the Analytics recruiter. The following day I received a call with saying that they debated my candidacy for quite a while and elected to pass on me. The reason I was given was that there was concern that I did not demonstrate experience in managing stakeholder requests/expectations. I was told that my technical ability otherwise exceeded expectations for the role. The recruiter told me that they still consider me a candidate for the Analytics organization and that they will circle back with me in 6 months. The final result of this process is frustrating to say the least. The reason they gave for rejection seems extremely vague and the recruiter did not seem to receive any specific examples of where this attribute was being tested nor my insufficient responses. It is doubly concerning that the interviewer said she will contact me again in 6 months and still considers me a valid candidate. This combination of vague feedback and the desire to reach out to me again in the near future makes me think there is something wrong internally. As an additional note, before the on-site I was told that there was a specific team that would likely be the best fit for me. I was told the on-site lineup would mostly consist of members of this team. Only one member of the team was present during the interview and it was unclear if they were even the hiring manager. If I was hiring someone onto my team, I would make sure to be in attendance. I think the most frustrating part of this process was that it took over a month to be told I am great fit but I will not be extended an offer of any kind. I feel the interview process to which I was subject does not allow candidates to demonstrate ability with relevant skills. The final reasoning for rejection makes little sense in the context of the process, which lends me to believe there is something else going on. I was told by multiple sources to avoid interviewing with this company and my experience has certainly reinforced that sentiment.