The interview process was fairly straightforward - it included an introductory call with HR, a Case Study assessment, and a panel of final interviews. Everything was completed remotely. Prior to interviewing with Perpetua, I did a lot of research and was pretty familiar with the company. There are a lot of reviews here that differ from my experience. HR was amazing, communicating with me at each stage of the journey to make sure I felt equipped and comfortable to complete the next steps. However, there were a few red flags that I thought were worth noting for future interviewees or iterations on this particular hiring process. 1. Professionalism of Interviewers There was an instance during my meeting with a Senior Data Strategist where the interviewer was laughing as I struggled to explain something. This was not cool - especially as something like this speaks to flaws in the wider company culture. It should be expected that interviewers maintain a sense of composure when talking with candidates. 2. Structure of Panel Interviews There were four, 30 minute, back to back interviews with different members of the company. These meetings were supposed to focus on different things, but reflecting on the 2 hours I spent with the Perpetua team, felt muddled and unorganized. There was a lot of overlap in the questions asked, taking up a fair amount of time during each of the calls. I believe it would be better for everyone involved if there was a bit more structure to these meetings especially given the length and complexity of the panel. This ensures that there is ample time available for the candidate to elaborate on their examples, ask questions, and better allocate time - there's a lot you can get done in 2 hours!

Chaotic and disorganized recruiting process. Applied for a completely different role, but was contacted and told that they thought I could be a good fit for the Data Strategist role instead. They asked if I'd like to have a conversation to understand this role better. Turns out this "conversation" was actually an interview with behavioural-based questions. No problem, not helpful to better my understanding of the role they had suggested to me., and definitely not a casual conversation. Next step was another conversation/ interview. Neither of the two individuals I spoke with at this point were at liberty to discuss compensation with me. Instead I was given the contact information of a VP and told to email him if I wanted to understand the compensation structure of this position...? I don't know, pretty basic question before asking somebody to proceed to the assignment and interview phase, given how time consuming they are for both parties. Next step was a lengthy assignment which took multiple hours over multiple days to complete. This was followed by 3 hours of interviews with 6 different people. In one of those interviews, I was ask to present my assignment. Another person coordinated the set-up of these interviews. Despite offering to answer any questions I may have about the interview process, my basic questions about the structure of the assignment presentation went unanswered. The structure is six back to back interviews with no time in between. Mostly, everyone was friendly, personable and professional. In the end, I was told I'd hear back in the next day or two, I never did. It was not until I followed-up a week later that I was told I was unsuccessful. After investing a ton of time into this, I asked for some simple feedback - none was given. As a start-up, I'd expect some disorganization and lack of process, but this was something else. I offer this review not as a critique but as feedback to improve what was a truly regrettable candidate experience.