Position advertised on craigs list. Sent in resume directly on internet. CEO made an appointment for a telephone interview. This gave me an opportunity to find out a little bit more about the charity and the position. This also gave the interviewer the opportunity to judge whether or not I was a good fit for the job. The interview turned out very well, and it appeared that I was a good fit. We arranged a proper interview when I would meet the CEO and other employees. The 1:1 interview went very well, and the CEO told me how excited she was about me, what a good fit I was etc. I met one other person (at the time there were only 3 full time employees) and that interview went well. I was shown a database and had little difficulty picking up how to use it. I was given a writing test to submit later, which I did. I was also asked to do a personality test, which I did, and thought the outcome was an excellent fit with the charity. I had all the attributes that they were looking for. The CEO emphasised the need for someone who paid attention to detail - I was clearly that person and gave her evidence of this. To my surprise, a week later she called to say I was no longer a good fit, I didn't pay attention to detail (how could she know that especially when I had contrary evidence, and I have since taken a job that definitely requires attention to detail, in finance), and that my personality was too much like hers and the other two employees. I was extremely upset, and still feel I was an excellent fit for the job. I have taken a less meaningful job, but at least I am employed and I am somewhat valued. My take on this is that the CEO was not as perceptive as she thought she was and showed poor judgement. Interestingly, where I currently work, one of the owners has also shown extremely poor judgement with one employee. If you work for a private company or charity, you have to accept the "owners" judgement and are at their mercy. It can work for you, or against you, as I am discovering.