It was described as a 3-4 part interview process – first, a phone screening, followed by an in-person interview with leaders, then the audit staff, human resources, and a written exam, a third in-person interview with another manager, and a fourth interview by skype with a company executive working on the east coast. The phone interview went well, although most of the questions were on audit basics, which should have been ascertained from the discussion with recruiters and the resume. The second interview began to go sideways quickly. The written exam was supposed to be an hour, but one of the interviewers representing human resources failed to show for their interview, so I was sequestered in a room for nearly two hours by myself. A representative then came in exasperated and said that they forgot to prepare for this interview and had no questions, and asked if I had any for them. Prepared for questions anyway, , I asked about company culture, benefits, and structure (they were undergoing a massive re-org) and the position itself. Unfortunately they couldn’t answer any. Finally, I asked on a scale of one to ten (casual to strict) where the company was positioned in relation to other firms in the Seattle area. They replied, “I don’t know – I don’t get to wear sandals, but I saw a girl wear pink pants, so maybe a six?”. I was flabbergasted. I then had coffee with a staff member in the department I was interviewing for, who was actually pleasant and well spoken. We exchanged some general questions, and it felt like the interview might be salvaged. Finally, I met with another manager, who asked that I reply to every question as if they was six years old. It was awkward request, but I followed through and carried out the interview in a professional manner. The entire process took approximately 4.5 hours. At the end, they indicated that I might be overqualified for the position, for which I responded, “I believe I’m well qualified, but not over-qualified”. They indicated that there would be two more interviews after this – interview with another manager and then a company executive via skype. They indicated that because the manager was new, it would be unfair to them to have an employee selected on their behalf. I agreed, although I was put off by the fact they were not putting themselves in the best light based on their presentation Two weeks later I met with the newly hired manager, who was personable. The manager made two comments initially that gave me pause. First, they made repeated references to the firm I was currently working at and another firm that they worked at and verbally stressed that we were ‘peers’, and that their former firm employed several of my firm’s current employees. I didn’t give it much thought and progressed through the interview, attempting to read and mimic their traits in a subtle way to appear approachable. At the end they said, “Please don’t take this the wrong way, but you are very intelligent, accomplished, and articulate”. I was taken aback, but replied, “Oh, thank you – none taken”. They followed up with a death-knell statement, “you know, this really comes down to fit”. I knew then that it was over, as I had a strong feeling that they felt that I represented some sort of material threat to them. They promptly called back and said that they were going with someone else. In a way they was right, it wasn’t a good fit if a manager can’t see the value in having a capable person working below (or even alongside) of themselves to help propel a team forward.