I read thru most of the pertinent interview reviews and can say that the descriptions of the process are accurate. Everyone has reported that the entire interview is recorded for review and discussion after you've left. A few candidates have mentioned the non-disclosure agreement, which states that the process can't be disclosed and that Bridgewater can use the recordings in any way that they want.
Each interview lasts for about 55 minutes. You will be thanked and allowed to leave if any interview team reports that you didn't pass the criteria for their part of the interview. The interviews take place in a conference room which is stocked with coffee, water, soft drinks - and they bring a light lunch in for you. During your lunch, you review videos and culture material.
Everyone is very polite towards you and enthusiastic about being a Bridgewater employee. Each team has a packet with your resume, comments from the recruiter and probably the transcript of your phone screening. They also have a sheet to fill out and what looks like a scoring summary. Their feedback becomes increasingly detailed as the day progresses.
I think that the interview process may have been designed by a psychologist. The goal is to analyze how you think and how you respond to feedback and scenarios. I'm OK with feedback, especially if it's helps one to improve - and I can say that the feedback about my skills was accurate.
What troubled me was the feedback about my motivations and expectations, which is a "value". (compare that to an "attribute" such as logic or analytic thinking or a "skill" which is your experience).
The interview was an opportunity for me to introduce myself to Bridgewater but it was also an opportunity for me to determine whether it would be a good place for me to work.
One of the interviewers did not assess me to be motivated enough and that I had failed with most of that session's interview questions. My logic and thinking passed, but behaviorally, I was told that I failed and why I failed. Apparently, I was "too laid-back" and "submissive", which was not in line with feedback from other jobs that I've had. Often, I've been told that I need to learn to be more persuasive and less "absolute" in my opinions and approach towards problem solving.
Coincidentally, the session was the final session of a very long day. I believe that most of the feedback was designed to see how I would react and what my response would be. I stated that there are generational differences in behavioral motivation and answers but received the comment that my comment was an excuse.
I had read the founder's "Principals" and reviewed the employee videos which are on the website.
The first 37 pages cover history and development of the principals, while the remaining 86 pages discuss culture and feedback. I found myself nodding and understanding many of the points.
What I observed was the opportunity to use the "Principals" to reject the natural differences in people. The devotion to the "Principals" seems a bit extreme and there is the potential to use the guidance to "break down" an employee into compliance. It felt like a frat or sorority rush week in which candidates would do anything to comply and be accepted.
I finally decided that Bridgewater was a good place for the employees who are working there, but not a good fit for someone like me. Although I liked the idea of feedback in general, I sensed that I would always be receiving feedback because I would not "fit in".
During my 6 hour interview day, I had the opportunity to see the workers outside the glass window. There were no female employees on the floor (other than the receptionist, HR rep and the hospitality server) and I should say it might be a different observation if one viewed the trading floor. The men were ethnically and racially diverse, but no one seemed to be much more than 32 or 35 years old. I did not observe anyone with a disability or a special need, but it's possible that there were accommodations made.
