O processo de entrevista foi extremamente bem conduzido pelos chefes de departamento. A conversa foi fluida e envolvente, focando nas minhas experiências e em como eu poderia contribuir para o time. As perguntas foram pertinentes e bem estruturadas, permitindo que eu demonstrasse minhas habilidades e alinhamento com a empresa. Além disso, senti que houve um interesse genuíno em conhecer meu perfil profissional e minhas expectativas. Foi uma experiência positiva e enriquecedora.

In the lead-up to the interview, my interactions with the recruiter were very positive, and I had high hopes for the opportunity. However, the situation took an unexpected turn when I was asked to complete an online test. The evaluation software presented scenarios that were completely different from what had been discussed in the video and the accompanying word document. Furthermore, some of the questions seemed unrelated to the workflows they had initially provided. While I was prepared for questions related to aviation and geography, I was surprised to encounter two additional personality tests as part of the evaluation. It's worth noting that these personality/personal questionnaires can pose unique challenges for older candidates like myself. With decades of experience in the workforce, our responses may naturally differ from those of individuals applying for entry-level positions. Unfortunately, despite my best efforts, I received feedback from HR stating that I did not meet the required score of 3.75 on the test. Consequently, I was not given the opportunity to proceed to an interview with the hiring manager. This experience has left me with the impression that there might be ongoing challenges in filling the Mission Advisor positions, which aligns with what I've observed in other reviews. It's disheartening when the selection process doesn't fully capture the qualifications and potential a candidate can bring to the role, especially after positive initial interactions with the recruiter.