The interview was conducted remotely and felt heavily focused on SAFe theory and release-related questions rather than practical RTE delivery scenarios. The interviewers did not have cameras on, which made it harder to build rapport and gauge engagement. Some of my answers required translating concepts across roles (e.g., programme-level delivery vs release/test perspectives), and it occasionally felt like the panel’s focus was more aligned to release/test leadership than an RTE function. Overall, the process was structured, but I would have appreciated clearer alignment on what the role is optimising for (true RTE responsibilities vs release/change coordination) and a more interactive discussion around real delivery challenges. It would have been good to clarify the scope of the role and align the interview panel to it. If the role is RTE, include interviewers who operate at ART/portfolio level. If it’s primarily release/change focused, position it that way. Encourage cameras on (or explain why not) to improve candidate experience.