A short screening conversation with recruiter, followed by a remote video interview with two interviewers, which was structed by introductions of the three participants, CV run-through and two competency questions asked. There were two more interview stages planned thereafter. Few issues, which form my feedback: * Information provided by recruiter is not aligned to information I received at the remotely held interview with two interviewers * When I applied, the role was advertised as 'remote'. At start of the video interview it was made clear to me that the role would be 'on-site'. When I asked for clarity it turned into a 'hybrid' role worked from London office & home without further details provided by interviewers on how such a hybrid model should look in practice. * The remote video interview got booked for an hour's duration with the invite expressing for it to be a 45 min. call. During the actual interview I learned that it lasted for 30 min. as I got interrupted by one of the interviewers at that point in time. There was no time left for me to ask questions. * I felt that the remote interview process was rushed without getting true value from the conversation. The 'human' side of the interview was missing. * One of the interviewers expressed that travelling between UK and Poland will be required in this role. The job advert has no mentioning about it, which is a shame as the travelling aspect could be a great benefit for one candidate and less suitable for another one, hence it would help manage expectations from start. In summary, the role seems to have got adjusted from the time I had applied to once I got interviewed. The short time-line put on the actual conversation is something, which I recommend for Relativity to review if the company wants to get true value out from candidates.