I recently interviewed with Octavius for an EA position and, while I appreciated the professionalism and initial communication, the overall experience was very disappointing.
Throughout the process, it became increasingly clear that there was a strong internal or previously affiliated candidate in the running. Competing against someone with prior experience in the exact position is understandable, but it would have been helpful and more transparent to know this from the outset.
I first interviewed with Talent Acquisition through Fitzgerald (an outsourced recruitment firm), then completed a detailed test, and had a 1:1 virtual meeting with the current EA — all of which required significant time and preparation. However, there were still indications that the outcome may have been largely predetermined.
I travelled to London to interview with Octavius, the Executive Chair, and Christoffer, the CEO. I had been advised by Talent Acquisition to review Christoffer’s LinkedIn profile in preparation (what I of course did before being advised), but the CEO did not attend, and nobody informed me beforehand that he would be absent. As someone currently between roles, the time and cost of commuting made this even more disappointing. My interview with Octavius also felt a bit rushed, taking place on a Monday at 5 p.m for about 20 minutes.
The discrepancy between the preparation guidance and the interview itself contributed to a sense that the process wasn’t fully aligned.
While I genuinely liked the company and the people I interacted with, it felt as though considerable effort was invested into a process where my chances were minimal from the beginning. Greater transparency about the candidate pool and clearer communication around interview expectations would have helped create a fairer and more respectful experience.
The company has a very low score on Glassdoor, and experiences like this help explain why. Candidates’ time, effort, and circumstances should be better considered.
