The selection process for the HR Specialist role was one of the longest I’ve experienced, with multiple stages (screening, aptitude testing, problem-solving case, and finally the “bar raiser”). Unfortunately, the final interview felt misaligned with both the role and the earlier steps. The structure of the last interview left little room for meaningful discussion. I was asked to talk for an extended period without interaction or follow-up. It felt more like a monologue than a proper assessment. Across the entire interview, I only received three questions. One of them repeated information I had literally just explained, which made it clear the interviewer had not paid attention to my answers. The focus of the questions was also misaligned with the HR Specialist role. I was asked why I succeeded in sourcing for a hard market, despite the fact that sourcing is not central to the position. My actual HR experience, directly relevant to the role, was not explored at all. When I tried to ask about HR operations, SLAs, team metrics, and future plans, none of my questions were answered directly. The few responses I did receive were vague or contradictory, which only created more confusion. A concerning moment was when automation replacing HR roles was mentioned out of nowhere. While I understand the intent may have been to test resilience, discussing such topics in a hiring process risks discouraging strong candidates rather than motivating them. Overall, the process was extremely time-consuming and felt more like an endurance filter than a real evaluation of HR skills. The recruiter supporting me was excellent, but the structure of the final stage made the overall experience frustrating and unproductive. Final note: If Revolut truly wants to “raise the bar,” interviewers need to stay engaged, ask role-relevant questions, and answer candidates’ questions transparently. Otherwise, the process risks filtering out capable HR professionals for the wrong reasons.