TLDR Communication and feedback are of key-importance, and this is what gives the true measure of how an Organization treats and regards people. In the absence of that, it makes one wonder what other concerning shortcomings lurk behind the glossy surface. /TLDR I applied online for a Software Development Manager position, and I came out with mixed feelings after interacting with PerkinElmer's staff during 3 rounds of interviews. Negative #1 - I received a stock rejection email within 24h of applying online, stating that my profile/skill-set is not a match for the position. Next day though, I received another email from a Talent Acquisition recruiter, saying that the Director of Software Engineering is really interested in my profile and wants to meet online ASAP. (Definitely a very confusing moment.) Positive #1 - Talked on the phone with the recruiter, received apologies for the rejection email, yet they have no idea who/why my application got rejected. We discussed for 30 minutes and moved ahead for the next screening interview. Positive #2 - Met online with the Director of Software Engineering, spent 30-45 minutes, to learn about each other and the open position specifics, altogether a very positive and informative experience. At the end I have been told that I qualified for a tech interview meeting with the whole team, as well as an interview with the current Software Development Manager.  Positive #3 - A 2h online interview:  ~1h with the whole team (4-5 people) for tech/architecture skill-set questions,  ~1h with Manager and Director for assessing my management/leadership skill-set.  I was really impressed by the friendly atmosphere, the position relevant questions, as well as the answers I received to my questions. (I have the experience of running over 150 job interviews, and I know how much energy and skill one has to put on...) Negative #2 - I was expecting at the Tech interview to use a virtual whiteboard, particularly that MS Teams provides such functionality. It would have really helped, for both sides. When I asked if I could draw a diagram, I was invited to try to draw/describe a mental picture. Not sure if that was sarcasm, frustration or it just was part of the challenge. Needs Improvement #1: No probing/follow-up questions. One must make *sure* that the applicant gave a correct answer, as well as that she really has a grasp of the concept. At the end of Interview#3 I was told that they were about to let me know, within less than a week's time, whether or not we're moving to the next stage: meaning Interview #4. At that point I already knew I would not make it, realizing that I was overqualified as a Manager (coming from managing 4 teams/20+ people, to manage a team of 5 professionals) and yet I also was under-qualified for their Tech-stack. I was under the impression that they expected me to already know certain Tech advanced concepts, rather than assessing my capability of [quickly] learning them, but that's OK; they might have been under some sort of urgency, where one's learning new things was not that relevant. [Huge] Negative #3 - This is the reason for which I am going to rate it as an overall negative experience: I have been left hanging, in total "radio silence". I am perceiving it as a form of quite unprofessional and very blatant lack of courtesy towards an applicant. Whomever the applicant might be, regardless of their skill level, even regardless of the conclusions drawn after an interview, it is *expected* from employers, as basic professional courtesy, to present applicants with a "no, thank you" or a "we need more time to decide", i.e. a clear and timely message. 8 days after the Interview #3 I followed up with a formal email, addressed to the Talent Acquisition recruiter who was my point of contact, and as of the time of this posting, i.e weeks later, I haven't received any form of answer to my inquiry. In retrospect, although the business domain and the tech-stack looked extremely fascinating, I am thankful that it's been a "fail fast" process, and that I'm *not* part of this Organization.