Envision Pharma Interview Questions
& Process

The whole thing started on their website, where the first red flags showed up: they explicitly ask a candidate’s sexual orientation and chronic illnesses. Despite their having the option ‘prefer not to answer,’ it does not seem normal to me for European standards. It made me think I was maybe on a phishing website or somehow an illegitimate offer. I confirmed it twice and thrice, and sent an email to HR, which answered they do so for DEI inclusive policies. Again, I'm not sure this is the way - at least when recruiting in Europe. In this phase, you answered their questions and attached your CV. The second phase was an online interview with an automated process that asked work-related questions (four questions, I believe). You have 3 minutes to prepare after hearing the recorded question, and you have two or three attempts for saving your best answer. I did not make it after this phase. I should have gotten feedback early January, waited two weeks, sent them an email, and got the answer that they decided due to business constraints not to proceed with the position. How long they stay with my data, video, CV, and what they do with my data, was never explained. I think it should be mandatory they explain how your data will be handled.

I applied for AMW through the talent acquisition pool. The whole hiring process was a bit lengthy (it took about three months from application to receiving an offer), but it was a delightful experience. The process consists of three stages: an initial screening interview with a talent acquisition partner, a writing assignment, and a final interview with a three-member panel. At the first stage, I interviewed with Vicky, who was super lovely and also supportive throughout the entire process. For the writing assignment, you need to produce a short synopsis of a clinical study and a slide-deck in one week. The final interview was one of the best experiences I had in a long time. On my panel were the Head of Scientific Solutions, the Scientific Portfolio Director and the Associate Scientific Director. The interview lasted about an hour and felt like a friendly professional discussion. There were elements of a regular interview that blended in nicely.

The interview process was straightforward and transparent, which was a welcome change from other roles I was interviewing for simultaneously. There were about 5-6 steps in the other processes, so Envision's simpler approach was refreshing. The talent acquisition partner was really helpful, and the system was well-organized with all communication and invites coming from a central source. Managing my application was easy because it was all done online within the Envision system. Unlike other interviews where it was unclear where I stood or what the next steps were, Envision's process was clear about timelines and progression. It was also beneficial to know in advance who would be participating in each meeting.

They weren't clear about the job requirements. They wanted to build a QA team from scratch, needing one person to handle everything from setting up the quality layer for all projects to automation and DevOps responsibilities. I was given an assessment to create a test strategy, plan, and tool recommendations for their app. In the next round, they barely let me present the assessment and instead treated it as a DevOps interview. The interviewers were a developer and a DevOps person for a QA role, which seemed illogical.