Behavioural Insights Team Interview Questions
& Process

The process kicked off with 3 questions covering econometric models, experiment design, and a behavioral query. Next up was a timed data task where I had to analyze experimental data to see if a policy worked. The third stage involved a structured interview with more questions on econometrics and experiment design. I didn't progress further, but the whole thing moved fast and was quite interesting. It felt a bit odd though, needing to put in a lot of work before even discussing the role with anyone.

The hiring process for the Research section, which needs managerial and data skills, involves three main stages. First, they reviewed my CV via email. Then, I completed an online assessment with multiple-choice questions, followed by six scenario-based questions and three data-related questions. The final stage was an in-person interview at BIT offices, with a potential for a second interview. This was quite a negative experience overall. I wasn't asked any follow-up questions or questions about my skills or character beyond what was pre-written. Despite having a PhD and prior management roles in similar consultancies, these areas weren't explored. The initial in-person interview (Round 1), scheduled for 50 minutes but lasting about 30, had people waiting for over 15 minutes. The Chief of Research seemed disengaged, didn't make eye contact or notes, and was frankly disrespectful. Another interviewer, from a different department, openly admitted they were only asking questions from a provided sheet. The third interviewer seemed more HR/managerial, asking scenario-based questions with minimal follow-up, though they did take notes and appeared engaged. The data questions posed were irrelevant to my known skillset, and despite my attempts to redirect them to my strengths in areas like 'difference in differences,' propensity score matching, and randomized control trials, which were listed in the job description, there was no interest. It became apparent they were specifically looking for candidates with econometric/epidemiological analysis methods and were just ticking boxes. The whole experience left me uninterested in working there, feeling it was a waste of time.

After my initial application, I was invited to the virtual assessment centre. The first step involved answering three written questions, max 250 words each. One was an email writing task, one was about how I would approach being asked to help with a task which would clash with an existing deadline, and the other was to propose a behavioural intervention. Then there was a two hour long writing task, where I had to propose a creative and innovative behavioural science solution to a social problem. This was followed by a group exercise where we were asked to put together a presentation, proposing behavioural solutions to make the fashion industry more eco-friendly. I didn't get to the next stage of application (an interview). While the quality of candidates was amazing, I was really disappointed by the feedback given. I was told that even though I did very well in the group task (in both proposing ideas and coordinating the group), I was let down by being nervous at the very start. For the writing task, despite the instructions having explicitly stated I should propose an innovative solution and not worry about the practicalities of it, my feedback told me that I didn't talk enough about the feasibility of my proposal - something we were explicitly told not to do! A three-hour long assessment centre should come with more notice, and maybe even be held on a Saturday to ensure candidates don't have to drop out or have awkward conversations with their employers.

After submitting my online application, I got invited for an interview. The next step involved a work-based assessment and the interview itself. The assessment asked me to analyze some data using R or Stata and write a one-page report. Even though the interview was scheduled after the assessment deadline, we didn't discuss it. The interview started with questions about my motivation for applying and my general understanding of data science, like potential impact areas. I was asked one question about a past statistical project. My CV or previous experience wasn't really brought up, and there were no STAR questions. The main focus was a hypothetical project, with questions on data collection and how to measure model performance, with follow-up questions for most of my answers. The interviewers were helpful, despite some tough questions. I had 15 minutes at the end to ask my own questions. It was an unusual process as my CV wasn't a focus, but it felt fair because they seemed keen on assessing my skills directly.