Recently gave an interview at Jupiter Money for Senior PM role:
1. There is an exploratory call to judge the fit - experience, skill and culture wise.
2. I was told there will be 3-4 rounds of interview and after that they will decide based on cumulative feedback of all the rounds
3. My first 2 rounds were scheduled - product sense and product strategy rounds.
4. First, The round got scheduled thrice.
5. I finally did my product sense round and to me it was one of the the best case study interview I gave. To the proof I also have complete documentation of the live case study I solved and also showed that to few senior product leaders in the industry. They also validated that that it was really well solved.
6. Next day I was told my round didn’t go as well and they are even cancelling the other rounds. There was no precise feedback which is anyway not expected. I communicated that according to the process I was told that all the rounds would happen and then a decision would be taken.
7. They ridiculed that. To me it was the case of strong personal bias where interviewer preferred other candidates because of his alumni or for other reasons or strongly did not like me. To avoid personal biases usually organisations do parallel rounds at senior level and take a decision based on cumulative feedback.
In hindsight, it’s good it didn’t happen. Better to join a merit based organisation then biased and politics led.
