Upon arrival the interviewer was about 15 minutes late, probably because of the lifts, which we then had to use to get to the meeting room which without exaggerating probably took another 10 minutes. I was immediately asked for my passport which I was not instructed to bring at any stage by the recruitment team, nor do I think it's suitable for a company to keep a record of every single first round candidate's passports anyway. To summarize what was an hour and a half interview, I was basically told that I would not be doing much more than attending client meetings to write notes for the first 6-12 months. I was told this was so the first part of a structured programme which would allow me to learn the basics, this would have been fine (or even ideal) if it were my first job however I already had 2+ years experience working in a very similar role for a similarly large broker, and was looking to take the next step in my career as mentioned in my cover letter. Not only was interviewing me a waste of everybody's time, there are thousands of candidates out there who would be suitable for this opportunity being overlooked. It seemed like a classic case of a large broker trying to hire the most qualified person for the job even if they're not the most suitable candidate, the aim is usually to hire the best possible CV for the lowest possible cost rather than the most suitable CV at a fair cost. After over an hour of questioning, which included both a mixtures of Aon's mandatory set questions and their own, and explaining about the role (which in reality was completely different to the job description), I was then given a technical test. I was handed a piece of paper with 10-15 handwritten questions, with a space to answer which I did and handed back. It was then marked in front of my, and I was given my score. Keep in mind this was after I was told I would be taking notes for at least 6 months, it felt odd to then test my technical knowledge. It was all very strange and took me back to my school days.