Jupiter

Role: Senior PM

College: Not Specified

Interview Date: May 2024

Interview Type: Full-Time

Result: Rejected

Difficulty: Not Specified

Rounds: 2 rounds completed (out of 3-4 planned)

Topics Asked: Product Sense, Product Strategy

Experience:

This candidate interviewed for a Senior PM role at Jupiter Money. The process was supposed to involve an exploratory call followed by 3-4 interview rounds, with a decision based on cumulative feedback.

Exploratory Call:
This call was to assess fit based on experience, skills, and culture.

Scheduled Rounds:
The first two rounds, a product sense round and a product strategy round, were scheduled. The scheduling itself faced issues, with the round being rescheduled three times.

Product Sense Round:
The candidate stated that this was "one of the best case study interviews" they had given and had documentation to prove it, which was validated by senior product leaders.

Result and Feedback:
The next day, the candidate was informed that their round "didn't go as well," and the remaining rounds were canceled. No precise feedback was provided. The candidate expressed that this felt like a case of strong personal bias from the interviewer, potentially due to alumni preference or other reasons, and believed they were strongly disliked. They noted that organizations usually conduct parallel rounds at senior levels to avoid such biases and base decisions on cumulative feedback. In hindsight, the candidate felt it was good that it didn't work out, preferring a merit-based organization over one with biases and politics.