I interviewed for a UX Researcher role at King’s Stockholm office. The position was for a game that did not yet have an established UX research team, so the technical interview was conducted by senior members of the UX research organization from another team.
My experience left me concerned about how feedback was formed and communicated. Some conclusions felt based on assumptions rather than the full context of my approach. For example, I was told that proposing a mixed-methods research approach combining specific methods is “not something we do at King,” and this was used to question my suitability as a researcher.
One piece of advice for future candidates: make sure the hiring manager for the specific product or team is actively involved in the process. When interviews are conducted solely by researchers from the same team, especially where there is a direct reporting relationship, power dynamics can unintentionally influence the evaluation.
After the process, I formally requested a review of my recruitment process and the feedback, and provided supporting evidence for context. I repeatedly clarified that I was not asking for the decision to change, but aiming to contribute to better hiring practices. Despite this, my concerns were dismissed and I was told the interviewers’ judgment stands.
Overall, I hope the company invests in better interviewer training and takes greater care not to waste candidates’ time. The role has been reposted several times over the past six months and has recently been reopened again, so future candidates should approach the process with caution.
I do want to highlight that the recruiters and People team were responsive and professional in their communication. While my concerns were not acknowledged, they did take the time to respond to my inquiries, which I appreciate.
I applied online. I interviewed at King (Barcelona) in Jan 2026
Interview
Had 3 rounds of interviews, first with recruitment, then a people manager and finally with the Tech director and PM.
All interviews were very people centric, fairly standard and easy to navigate interviews, a couple of tricky questions.
Everyone was very smart which made the conversations interesting. The scale of King was the most exciting part of it.
I was told 2-3 times that the company went through a difficult period after the Microsoft acquisition, that they had laid off a bunch of people 6 months ago.
And when discussing the team, the words "problems" and "burnout" were used a few times.
The process was overall very slow, I let them know I was in final stages with other roles.
We discussed compensation but the overall package was weak and not competitive with what I was offered elsewhere. Which surprised me for a company owned by Microsoft.
I took another offer in the end and decided to not pursue further.
Used HireVue as first assessment, then rounds of technical and behavioural interviews. HireVue process was long, though beyond this stage is quite typical of that of any of major company.