Capgemini Invent Interview Questions
& Process

I was referred to Capgemini Invent internally, but had to resubmit my application. Then I got asked for info I already sent, like salary expectations. A month later, my first interview. Then silence for 3 weeks. Another month passed before the second interview, but I couldn't join because they never sent an invite! I called the number on the slides, but it was wrong. The slides were old too. They rescheduled without an apology. I went to the rescheduled interview and heard nothing after. No feedback, no rejection, nothing. 5 weeks later, my application was closed on the portal. That was how I found out. Overall, 3 months, lots of chasing, outdated info, bad contact details, and no communication at the end.

Overall, the process is quite smooth and involves several exchanges. We start with an HR interview, which is more of a first contact. The main idea is to understand your background, what motivates you to join Capgemini Invent, and to see if there's a good fit, both from the candidate's and the firm's perspective. Next, there's a case study with a Director. This is an important moment, but the exchange remains quite interactive. We're looking for the ability to structure thoughts, to step back, and to demonstrate a managerial posture, rather than just having "the right answer." After that, you have a functional interview with another Director, which is usually more concrete. It involves a lot of discussion about your experiences, your role in projects, team management, and client relationships. This is generally a fairly natural conversation, close to real-world situations. Finally, the process concludes with a closing discussion with a Partner. This is more of an in-depth conversation about vision, ambitions, and how you see yourself growing within the firm. The objective is to validate mutual alignment and to look ahead. All in all, the process is demanding but quite supportive, with plenty of discussion and few "pitfalls."

The interview process was quite shocking, especially considering the significant decisions being made about hiring. It's a role that demands high standards, but the feedback from the group exercise was very poor, making me question the quality of the consultants assessing candidates. It felt like they 'invented' reasons not to hire me. The group exercise itself had issues: the group wasn't composed of people with the right skills, and the feedback didn't align with the stated assessment areas. I was criticized for using AI, going off-topic, and for the work of others in the team, despite receiving praise for providing structure and clarity. I was also criticized for not exploring the problem space enough, even though I explored it at multiple levels and suggested a multi-pronged approach. Despite being called a confident and effective leader, I wasn't hired. The feedback seemed contradictory and didn't reflect the key points discussed during the presentation. It felt like an ad-hoc assessment by consultants who might not be experienced in HR.

So, this was a bit of a weird one. Started with a technical interview where I just gave a quick overview of my experience and did a tech test, which was cool, but they didn't really dig deep into anything. Then there was a group thing where I teamed up with another developer to prep and then present to the 'CEO and CTO'. They threw in some technical questions there too. The agent said the feedback was good. After that, I had a quick chat to see if I fit a specific project, and they asked me stuff they should've asked in the first interview, like about leadership. Would have saved a lot of time.