My interview Experience 1. Upon review of my portfolio submission/application, Truss reached out to me to schedule a 30-minute call with another Sr. UX. It was scheduled a few days out from initial contact. Format: Zoom meeting. This interview was fairly high-level; I wasn’t given much of an opportunity to ask specific questions about the role, Truss’s process, resourcing/allocation, etc. It was definitely more of an evaluative interview for Truss’s benefit. 2. My second interview was scheduled with two engineers, which I thought was strange. By Truss’s own account, the second interview was supposed to give me an opportunity to discuss the role and my experience. I can appreciate the value of having an interviewer from another discipline, but there were zero opportunities for me to learn more about the UX team, their processes, what disciplines beneath the UX umbrella (research, strategy, interaction design, testing, etc.) I might engage in. As with the Sr. UX in my first interview, the two engineers were very nice, thoughtful and asked smart questions. However, I did not have a clue as to whether I even wanted to continue to pursue a role with Truss because I still knew nothing about the UX department. 3. My third interview (which took three weeks to schedule, due to the holidays) was finally (!) with two Sr. UXDs. This process, however, also differed from the automated email Truss sent out after my initial submission, describing this round as a weeklong work sample submission. I was told 36 hours before the actual interview that this was, instead, a 90-minute interview; 10 minutes for intros, 20 minutes for a portfolio piece walk-through and 60 minutes of a “collaborative pairing exercise” using Miro. The portfolio walkthrough, in my opinion, was too quick. This was my opportunity to shine and while, admittedly, I think I chose the wrong project to share, I may have felt better about my presentation had I not felt rushed. There was little time to stop during the presentation to discuss my process and for them to probe me on my decision-making, methodologies, etc. Or, for me to ask them about Truss’s processes, methods, etc. Again, there were no opportunities for me to assess Truss in any way. The 60-minute “pairing” exercise was… weird. I honestly had no idea what it was they were evaluating, despite my repeated attempts to gain more clarification (which only dug into my time for the exercise itself). I was given a prompt to solve for an internal Truss process. The other two Sr. UXDs were there to be my SMEs, but not to help me with the solution. So… in what way was this a collaborative exercise? I’m not exactly sure, even with a week since that interview to reflect upon the experience. I did my best to ask questions, leveraging them as my end-users. I thought aloud as I worked through how I might frame the challenges and opportunities, and did my best to articulate some kind of output. In the end, one Sr. UX served as my user (who I could probe for more info) and the other, my scribe. Asking me to digest a complex problem, work through some of the discovery questions/research, articulate my process, manage the intricacies of a Miro board, “collaborate” with Sr. UXs who could not actually help me with the problem, and come up with a solution in 45 minutes is an absurd exercise. I’ve been an agency UX for eleven years - I know how to work under pressure with tight deadlines and small budgets. No doubt I could make headway on a problem like that, but there was no way to feel confident about any part of that exercise, given the time constraints, vague direction and no understanding of what exactly they were evaluating.