Call with HR shortly followed by a hiring manager call. This is followed by a day where you meet with 3 other members of the company individually. Those 3 conversations cover: 1. Core value alignment: behavioral, tell me about a time type questions 2. Executive conversation: a talk with an executive which was fairly conversational with occasional questions about technical implementations from past work experience 3. Peer Interview: a casual conversation with another data scientist talking through past projects. Afterwards, I was invited to talk to another person and the conversation was mostly behavioral focused. Though it felt like they were not paying attention to me throughout the conversation which sucked. Overall, I would say this is a negative experience and the interview experience gave me a couple of red flags. First, apart from one question about explaining the bias-variance trade off in ML there was no other assessment of a candidate's technical expertise. All my conversations were behavioral in nature and repetitive, it felt like multiple conversations could have been consolidated since I was asked very similar questions about my past experiences. It made me worried about the capabilities of current and future data scientists that would join the team because the team isn't assessing their true technical capabilities via a take home test or pair programming assignment... i.e. I don't think just knowing about the bias-variance tradeoff will make you successful in this role Second, the lack of interest shown in some conversations. If your coworkers don't show any interest with you right of the bat, then what more when you're actually collaborating and working on projects. First impressions stick and it wasn't a positive one. I was initially excited about the prospect of working at Flock Safety as a data scientist but had a downer of an interview experience that I just lost interest by the end...