4 rounds of interview and 2 case studies. All had a mix of technical, competency and fit questions. Seniority of the panel got higher as the process went on. I was headhunted by an executive search firm for the role, at the Request of Aon, so was a cold approach on my part. Interviews were easy and straight forward, however the business were obsessed with very niche bits of experience that one would only get from working there, yet somehow this was my fault. Each stage I progressed the feedback came outside of the SLA all the interviews said they were passionate about. Feedback was always mixed and fair on the whole, however one interviewer complained about my background (we're having building work done to our home and some sheets of material are set behind my screen). As we're using their own system there was no way to shade the background. I thought this feedback was relatively unprofessional, I had apologised for it at the start of the interview, both said they didn't care and laughed it off. You're talking to me based on my skills and ability to do the job, not how my home looks. Final interview was with the Head of Strategic Change and was relatively straightforward. However 10 weeks later, recruiter and myself are still awaiting on feedback. I've been messaged directly saying they are still trying to secure funding which brings up a number of issues. Why waste over 12 hours of my time for this process if there's no role? Why waste around 10 hours of your teams time talking to me? Since this process has concluded, or I think it has concluded, I've been approached by another recruiter for the same role, despite recruiter 1 believing they had exclusivity. Overall, I would avoid. This Business Unit has no clue what they are doing, and seem happy wasting heaps of time.