First of all, when I applied for the job I don’t think my skill fits but the major matches so I applied for it anyway. Got two screening calls about two weeks apart one from HR asking my salary expections, the other from a senior scientist on the team asking typical background info. The senior scientist just asked if I am willing to learn when it comes to the particular skill that I don’t have. (I said yes, duh) And then no news at all till they suddenly want me to do an on-site interview two months later. (I already found a job at that time but I went anyway because I am curious about their on-site) On-site is a day of bombarding you with typical BQ from all the different departments/level people, another month later they told me that sorry they want someone with relevant skills. I am not upset about not getting an offer but it’s a complete waste of my time and a very lengthy, unnecessary interview process. They could have just found someone more fit instead of wasting a bunch of my time and have about 10 people talking about how they’re willing to train someone without that specific skill
Interview questions [1]
Question 1
Typical BQs Such as what difficulties have you encountered during your PhD and how you deal with it Nothing out of scope of typical BQ sheet Some questions regarding my ohD research but all very superficial because like I said in the beginning, it wasn’t a very good match
I applied online. I interviewed at Merck (San Francisco, CA) in Feb 2026
Interview
When I applied I had emailed the hiring manager too. I applied around November, and heard back from hiring manager in January. It went well. Recruiter called me 2 weeks after that. And I immediately had to fill out the candidate questionare after that. A week later, someone contacted me to plan the on site interviews. It was actually 4 weeks from then because of other scientist's availability.
Onsite interview started with my research seminar. They asked a lot of questions, some a little difficult. But they were all very intelligent questions. Executive director and director of the department was present for the meeting. Then I had one on one meeting with senior scientists, principal scientists and the directors. Lunch with lab members and back to more one on one meetings. I enjoyed talking to them. They asked about some behavioral questions but mostly about my experiences and future plans. What are the skills I want to develop etc. at the end of the interview, the hiring manager asked me to send recommendations. And my advisor got a request a week later. And another week until I was selected (mostly because I followed up a lot because I received a competing offer).
The process is more rigorous and scientific rigor is appreciated. You will have a phone interview followed by on-site interview for a day or two. You will give technical seminar followed by one-on-one interviews.
It was just funny. Throughout the entire interview they kept talking non-stop and didn't give me much chance to speak. I mean, wasn't I the one being interviewed? Instead of asking me questions, he kept emphasizing how messy their data is, how unsolvable their problems are, and how boring the papers they want to publish are. Was this an interview or a discouragement session? Oh, I get it now, a postdoc salary around San Fran is only $75,000. Even he can't stand it, so he's trying to discourage me as an act of kindness. Man, it's really a good deed. I'm about to cry my eyes out.
