Four or five interviews or tests, broken into three rounds: 1. Interview with CTO 2. Technical Test -- 3. Fit Interview with Head of People 4. Interview with Ops Lead (YMMV, this may be a walkthrough of the tech test instead) -- 5. Interview with CEO (didn't get this far) Interview with CTO was pleasantly surprising as a first round - I know they're small but it's not who you expect to be doing the screening. Really enjoyed speaking to the team and understanding the role, context and product. Some minor quibbles below aside, the interview process is wonderful - alertly run by Head of People, Beth, and the communication from the hiring team is thoughtful, patient and clear. They have a really good understanding of the culture they want and the kind of people who will help make that happen. I doubt I'll ever get a better, kinder rejection letter or post-interview feedback and support from a company in my life. A note on the technical test: it's a lot to do in a short amount of time (they recommend spending 4h on it), which might be a function (ha!) of my experience rather than the specs. One thing I'm always sceptical about though, are tests to build things that feel like you're doing free work. I always prefer a company asking you to walk through something you've built with one of their engineers (and even pair programming a new feature) rather than building a feature from scratch to their spec that, while is likely similar to what I will be doing in the role and makes it maybe easier for a heavily burdened team to evaluate, still feels like I'm just freely helping with the groundwork for a new feature. Knowing some companies actually do this intentionally should be a discouragement to all others from inadvertently coming across the same. I 100% know tiney falls in the latter category, but this may be something for them to consider when evaluating its efficacy, not as a test of skill, but as a approach to that testing. Other applicants may feel this is not an issue but it did feel unusual to me, restrictive and against the ethos of the team (hiring for potential rather than just skill). That said, I didn't feel penalised for this - the feedback was all constructive and accurate.