Overall a great experience! Excited to start soon. Pros: 1. The recruiter was very professional, easy to work with, and more importantly, didn't play any games. Found a great fit for me in the company (by recommending a new role when the first role wasn't the best fit), told me exactly what was coming in the interview, and was quick to respond to my questions. They put me in a position to succeed and made a fair offer in the end, and gave me the time and space to reflect on the offer. 2. The take-home assignment in my eyes was brilliant. Yes, it was a lot of work, but it also demonstrated the kind of work I would be working on at HubSpot, and that helped me make my decision to accept since I found the project interesting. HubSpot was flexible on the scope of the next steps, and the timeframe to do the analysis. 3. I was really impressed with the director who I interviewed in the final round, who answered my questions extremely well about the culture code, why they were building the team and what the next 5 years looked like, how were analysts evaluated and what were the biggest questions they were focusing on. It gave me the trust that I'm coming into a company with clear direction, and I know that my work will be valued. 4. I appreciated the confidentiality that HubSpot's team had in the process of the information presented in the interviews to better Areas of Improvement: 1. HubSpot can benefit from a platform where potential interviewees can ask questions (the only people I could interface with in the process and ask them questions, was with interviewers). While interviewers gave me space to ask questions, they were still evaluating me in the end, and having a person to just talk to and ask questions without having the pressure of feeling evaluated goes a long way in deciding whether you wanted to work for a company or not. Other companies (eg. FAANG) do this and it would further improve the already great recruiting experience. Also since Hubspot's culture code is unique, it would be a helpful platform for prospective candidates to better understand it. 2. Secondly, providing interview feedback between rounds is helpful especially since the process is long and candidates have the time and space to improve regardless of the outcome. 3. Minor but the take-home presentation interview could have been better organized. The presentation was meant to be to a stakeholder audience (i.e product manager/execs) I had two peer-interviewers for a presentation, and at times it was unclear to me the levels of detail to get into, and I had to clarify. Having a product stakeholder asking follow-ups in the room could be helpful in simulating the day-to-day presentation nature of the interview, rather than a peer pretending to be the stakeholder (the back and forth in the level of detail was a bit confusing). The aspect I did like the peer interview in the sense that I could dive into the details on how I executed the analysis, but finding a better way to organize the presentation vs. analysis methodology would be helpful.

I have mixed feelings about the interview process at Hubspot. The first thing I'll say was that the team was absolutely lovely. Every person I talked to there was incredibly warm and welcoming and I genuinely enjoyed the conversations I had. The process was fairly straightforward: a phone screen, a call with the team lead, a take-home assignment, and finally an in-person interview consisting of 4 rounds. What I really liked was that Hubspot was very open about what each round would consist of and gave preparatory materials ahead of time. Each round of the in-person interview was focused on a different area, so you don't end up answering the same questions over and over. And for the most part the conversations didn't seem weird and stilted, despite them reading the questions off of a sheet (there was one part where I asked for clarification on a question and he couldn't work out what the question was actually asking so we just skipped that one, but other than that it felt remarkably normal). What I wasn't crazy about was that the in-person interviews consisted 100% of 'tell me about a time when...' questions. I get where they're coming from with that, where they want to see how you reacted in real-world situations that are similar to what you'd see at Hubspot, but I feel like only using these kinds of questions is going to limit them to people that have come from similar companies as Hubspot. Sure, everyone's had a moment where they've faced adversity at work, so those kinds of questions make sense, but I was told that the reason I wasn't chosen was because I hadn't advocated for the data enough in my current job...but the reason I'm trying to leave my current company is because of a lack of data-driven decision making. Maybe at Hubspot it would be ok for someone to push back a lot if their recommendation isn't being taken into account since it's a horizontal workforce, but that's not the way it is in every company. I just think that it might be worth it to ask someone 'in a situation like this, how would you react' for some questions as well. It's still entirely possible that someone wouldn't react in the way they're hoping for, but I think it would give more people an opportunity.