Despite a seemingly gentle exchange, the substance was terrible. The recruiter (HR) was clearly inexperienced and lacked an understanding of her own role, reducing the process to a rigid keyword-matching exercise rather than a real evaluation of the candidate’s expertise. When faced with a question that was fundamentally irrelevant given the candidate’s background, she didn’t reassess her approach. Instead of recognizing that the candidate’s achievements far exceeded the simplistic criteria she was applying, she dismissed anything that didn’t fit into her narrow framework. There was no critical thinking, no ability to adapt, just a mechanical checkbox-driven screening. What made it worse was her lack of self-awareness, as if she were in a position to lecture someone with over a decade of experience leading high-value technological projects on an international scale. The contrast was striking: despite being a beginner with no real grasp of the subject, she spoke with certainty, while I, with years of high-level experience and concrete achievements, approach these topics with far more nuance and depth. Even more concerning was her narrow perspective. Though the company presents itself as international, she showed no awareness of how things actually work beyond her limited frame of reference. Rather than demonstrating an ability to assess career paths and global expertise, she seemed confined to a rigid and insular way of thinking. In short, a company best avoided by anyone with serious experience and high professional standards.

There were about 6 meetings in 1 day at the r&d center and 2 meetings at the headquarter with future colleagues, manager, and HR. Some meetings were technical and some personal.