After submitted online, I was contacted within a week. The recruiter was great a communicating the role and screening. I noticed there was hesitation in letting me know the names of the people of the team, I'd interview for. I met with the hiring manager and had a discussion and gained a sense that there was motivation to fire internally. Everyone was polite. The only feedback I had was to let me know I wasn't selected. I only found out because a survey request we sent to see how I found the process.

I went through a long and ultimately disappointing interview process with Sanofi. The entire process took roughly three months. After I applied, I was contacted by an HR representative and then interviewed by the hiring manager. Both conversations were friendly, and I was told they were very interested in my background. I was also asked whether I could work from the Cambridge office three days a week. Next came a one-hour panel interview. It went exceptionally well, and based on the feedback, I expected an offer. Instead, two weeks later HR reached out again to schedule additional interviews — one with a more senior leader and another technical interview. Both of these conversations went well too, with a mix of behavioral and technical questions. Afterward, I again expected a decision. Instead, 1–2 weeks later HR told me I was still a candidate but that they were also interviewing people outside the U.S. “to finalize the list of finalists.” That was unexpected and confusing. About a month after that, I was informed that the position had been given to a candidate from Europe. Overall, the process felt extremely drawn-out and indecisive. I invested a lot of time and energy and consistently received strong signals of interest, only for things to shift multiple times. It was a disappointing experience, and in hindsight it may be for the best — a hiring process this uncertain does not inspire confidence in how the organization operates internally.