Unfortunately, I did not have the most positive interview experience at Narrative Science. The process started off very positively - initial phone screen with the recruiter to determine my interest/fit in the role, to which the recruiter said that she thought I would be a great fit for the role. Next steps were a 30-minute timed writing assessment as well as a phone interview with the hiring manager, both went very well - hiring manager invited me into the office at the conclusion of my phone interview with her. The in-person interview is where the experience turned a bit negative. My first interviewer was 10 minutes late, so my 30 minute interview was cut to 20 minutes and felt rushed. The other interviews went well. Everyone who I met with was very kind, nice, and the interviews felt more like a conversation than an actual interview. Following this third-round interview is where the process took a turn (unfortunately) for the worse. I was told by one recruiter that this third-round in person interview was the final interview and that potential next steps would be reference checks. However, I was informed by another recruiter that they would actually be conducting a fourth round interview if I moved forward. This is a clear area of miscommunication and confusion. I was told I would hear back within a week of my interview with a status update, but it actually took three whole weeks for them to inform me that I had been rejected. It's funny because they actually didn't forget about me - they emailed me throughout these three weeks to ask if I had any further questions, see where I was in the job search, and let me know that they were interviewing other candidates, so it seemed as though they were still interested in me. The reasoning for the rejection was strange - I was told that I was a "standout" candidate and that there was "no negative feedback" from the interview team but that they had chosen to move forward with candidates who had a broader range of experience. I completely understand this reason as a valid rejection, but to me the fact that they dragged the decision out for three weeks and led me through three rounds of interviews and a writing assignment, only to reject me for a reason that could be gleaned from a resume seemed a bit wrong to me. I am not at all bitter by the rejection but by the confusing and long-winded process that they took me through to only reject me by the end. Everyone was so genial at the company and I thoroughly enjoyed my interviews, but it's clear that there needs to be work done on the candidate interview experience. The interviews themselves were a lot more about "getting to know you" than tough or trick questions. It seems that they just want to see if they like you as a person and if your skillset and career goals aligns with the position.