I was contacted by an internal recruiter via LinkedIn for a Director role in FTI's DC office and moved through a multi-stage process that was consistently conversational and engaging. Every interview felt genuinely back-and-forth, with a few laughs and discussions of mutual connections, which added to the sense that this was a strong mutual fit. After the initial recruiter screening, I met in person with the hiring manager for 45 minutes. During that conversation, the hiring manager explicitly shared that he wanted me to speak with the next two individuals in the process, which reinforced the momentum and made the path forward feel clear. The following week included two back-to-back in person 45-minute interviews with Managing Directors, followed by three back-to-back 30-minute virtual meetings the next week with additional senior team members labeled as “Final Interviews.” After this last round, I received a prompt email from the recruiter stating I was a top candidate and that the team was very excited about my fit for the role. Given the number of senior stakeholders involved and the amount of time invested, that message set a reasonable expectation of a timely and thoughtful close. Instead, several weeks of silence followed. I eventually reached out to the recruiter who responded saying they were wrapping up the process and thanked me for my patience. When the decision eventually came, it was an automated rejection email that did not even reference the correct title for the role I had interviewed for. For a firm of this scale and reputation, that level of inaccuracy at the final stage is difficult to interpret as anything other than a breakdown in internal coordination and basic candidate experience standards. The contrast between the strong interpersonal experience with the team throughout the interviews and the carelessness of the final communication significantly undermined confidence in the process and in FTI as a company.