Hubspan interview questions

Overall my impression of Hubspan is that of a conflicted, indecisive and incredibly internal-politics driven company who is unable to keep even their basic promises to potential employees. I applied to Hubspan from a listing on indeed.com. I was contacted by the recruiter about two weeks later. We setup a phone screen for the next day. The phone screen with the recruiter was approximately 30 minutes and went well, typical questions about background and relevant history for the job as Technical Manager. The recruiter contacted me the next day to setup another phone screen with the hiring manger. The phone screen with the hiring manager lasted approximately an hour and also went well. We covered many of the same basic questions but also discussed the challenges facing the department. The hiring manager took this time to basically complain about the past person in the role (they were a bad fit) and about the competing forces within the company and where the technology support department was going. I presented ideas which seemed to be well received and the call ended on a good conversational note. The following Monday I was contacted again and requested to come in for a round of 1:1 interviews with 3 or 4 senior leaders within the company at the VP and Director Level. I arrived for the interviews and was asked to wait for about an hour since my first interviewer was sick. Eventually they put me in a conference room with a subordinate and the sick interviewer via speaker phone. I proceeded to have 3 more interviews with various VPs, covering everything from my background to technical knowledge. Every interviewer was complaining about the other interviewers and making their case about what "we" need to do to change the working environment for the better. I was in the interview and felt as if I was in the middle of their political turf war already. One interviewer ended by saying "The next guy coming in is the head of the department who hates your department, so you have your work cut out for you." I was a bit taken aback; if this is what the interview is like, I seriously wondered what the working environment was like? The day ended with a 90 minute interview with the hiring manager/Director who discussed at length the problems they're having with some of their large customers and the internal politics preventing them from solving the problems. Our interview again ended on a very conversational tone and I felt confident about my performance as I was leaving. The interviews lasted about 4 hours in total. My impression was that it was far from an ideal working environment, but I would be receptive to an offer if they made one. I was told by the recruiter that they had more interviews scheduled but they would let me know one way or another in a week and a half. After 2 weeks of no contact, I emailed the recruiter again and indicated interest. I was told that my interviews went well but they had still had even more interviews to complete so had not made a decision but they would contact me in one week. Another week and a half later I contacted them and was told they had still not made a decision but they would have a decision soon, that I was still a front runner for the position, and they apologized for not not updating me and appreciated my patience. This cycle of telling me I was still a prime candidate but they had not made a decision, setting a date to contact me again, and then neglecting to contact me by that date happened for 7 more weeks. At every contact they told me I was still being considered, however after the 7 weeks of being lead on, they simply stopped returning my emails and calls asking for status. I can only assume that I really was still a viable candidate in their mind after 2 months, otherwise they would've stated otherwise, but the fact that they couldn't keep their story straight was deeply troubling. The messy and incoherent hiring process is symptomatic of internal problems within the company and frankly, I think may have dodged a bullet by not getting an offer.

Sent in a resume based on a posting on their website. Passed phone screen (just basic background questions) and went in one day to meet with 3 or 4 people - VP, Director level. This is a replacement for someone who after 3 - 4 years gave up and quit this job. Company appears to still need regular infusions of money from their investors. While the senior levels appear reasonably well paid, the rank and file seem underpaid and overworked. When we discussed what type of support engineers (not managers but front-line people) they mentioned that they can't pay great salaries so they have to settle for 'less the ideal people' (their words). Staff equipment is not regularly updated due to lack of funding (some people are using computers over 5 or 6 years old). I was told most people eat at their desk because everyone is so busy they can rarely get out to enjoy lunch. After the interview, I just wasn't interested in working here. In summary, an ok place if you're unemployed or need a job to survive but certainly not a 'silicon valley' type cool start-up.