Zurich Insurance Business Analyst Interview Questions
& Process

I had to solve 7 case questions and then do a presentation. It was at the office with the manager and the whole team asking questions. Overall, I thought it went okay.

So the whole process for this Senior Business Analyst role was pretty long, took about four weeks and had four separate interviews all in person. The first one was with the hiring manager and one of their team members, and HR showed up partway through. The hiring manager mixed up my name, which felt like they hadn't prepped. HR popping in late was a bit weird too, but the chat was okay, mostly about what I do day-to-day. HR asking about salary flexibility in front of the other person was a bit awkward. The second interview was supposed to be with two scrum masters, but they were late. They had a really rigid way of thinking, always suggesting workarounds for stakeholder issues instead of digging into why they rejected something. That felt pretty unprofessional. The interview ran way over time because they were late. The one who stayed gave me a totally different picture of the job than the hiring manager did. Honestly, the whole thing was badly run and they seemed inexperienced. Then, the third interview was with the hiring manager's boss, who was also late. That one was short and didn't really stand out. The company then threw in a surprise fourth round to check my technical skills. They gave a bunch of reasons for it, like questioning if I understood the role or was even interested. This round involved a case study: 5 minutes to get the problem, 40 minutes to work on it, and 15 minutes to present. I had to cover a go-to-market plan, user flow, epics, and sample user stories. After I presented, the hiring manager and their subordinate didn't ask many deep questions. The subordinate seemed to not know basic terms like 'Existing Conditions,' which was concerning. The hiring manager then admitted they're bad at judging people and have struggled with hiring before, mentioning that frustration from the scrum masters about past hires might have affected how they treated candidates. They also said they wanted someone exactly like their current subordinate, which was a bummer. Even though I got good feedback throughout, I got rejected the next week because they thought my 'technical' skills weren't up to par. It all felt really disorganized and all over the place. Having a subordinate review people who could be their peers made it even more confusing. I really hope they reflect on this and do better next time. Better communication, being more prepared, and a fairer way to evaluate candidates would make a huge difference.

We'll start with a video interview where we'll go over general competency questions. These are pretty standard and you'll see them at a lot of places. There won't be any technical questions or questions specific to the role, except for the usual 'why this company' and 'why this role' type questions. It's good to practice these, so here are some examples: Tell me about a time you worked well in a team, led a team, had a conflict and resolved it, maintained good relationships, made a tough decision, or overcame adversity or a challenge.