On the plus side, things started well. Organization and Planning of the interview was good. There was good communication (emails, phone discussion with HR was always clear), good organization and planning (clear details on who to meet, when, organized hotel bookings, booked taxis...). Only minor was couldn't access the canteen (I guess only for employees) and was asked to grab something outside (lot of restaurants outside but in August in Luxembourg all were closed). Initial interviews were ok. Had 2 initial phone screens with hiring manager and HR director, which were good. Was asked a couple brain teaser questions by hiring manager and questions on experience, competency, motivation. Face to face interviews, things turned quite differently. First was asked to do a couple of analytical, process tests. Analytical test was a piece of cake (questions like 2 trains going opposite direction... when will they meet?, Logical sequence of numbers...). Process test consists of looking at 2 sheets with product descriptions and spot mistakes and look at lines of orders and spot mistakes (piece of cake also). Did this but honestly didn't see the point. OK doing this well, so what? how would this tell I would be good at the job? Then the interviews were pretty much all situation based: Tell me of a time when you .....? I had 6 interviewers and all would ask me at least 2-3 of such questions. They all had a yellow sheet with sample questions to ask and would fill in. It felt a bit like interviewing style from the last decade... After a couple such question, it started to be quite repetitive and boring... (Is that all the questions you will ask me? I mean I have 10 years+ experience and 5years+ in tech globally.) I was asked a couple of questions outside of the templates but some of them turned quite grotesque. For example, I was asked: what is better Google or Facebook? I answered: in what way better? Reply: Better valuation. (???) I answered: Well today Google has higher valuation than Facebook He asked: Why is that? Does Google have a better business model? I explained that: Google has been in the business for longer hence has covered more markets, has penetrated more companies, has diversified its products and operates in multiple new industries.... He then replied: Ah ok. Assuming the same business model, same criteria, who has the best business model? (What a weird question; I am thinking where do you want to get at?) I answered: Assuming the same AD business model, since Facebook is still unpenetrated (less companies are on Facebook), the functionality works the same way as Adwords (you can highly target your audience, you pay per click, you get demographics data...) Facebook model would seem more valuable. Time was up and he replied: No, it is Google because Google ad model is based on search and on the search interest of the user. Which is a more important purchase decision. (??? Seriously... I mean are you saying this because Amazon has such a model in E-commerce? And it is seen from a purely E-commerce view) Before he felt, I answered: Not necessarily. You know that in the offline world Recommendation is generally assumed as most important factor for purchase. Facebook through its network has the ability to do that (that was before G+ launch) and tying up with MSFT, it could provide far better search results and a better business model than Google. It was a very weird interaction at the end of which I was really thinking: Really weird company. Very traditional one... I wasn't too keen exploring further; actually wanted to end this process quickly. I didn't get the role but I wasn't disappointed at all. I was asked later to be interviewed again for another role; I chose not to follow-up. Finally Luxembourg seemed quite dull city. There are tons of luxury/high-end shops in the town center but it is quite small and most close at 6pm. It seems also most people living there go to Belgium, France or Germany during the week-ends as activity in the city can be quite dull.