I applied online, and about 2–3 weeks later an HR recruiter contacted me to schedule the first interview. The initial conversation was informative, but it felt like the recruiter did not have a clear understanding of the position. They mentioned tasks that were more junior (e.g., simply connecting data sources), while the job description required a much more senior background—machine learning, real-world evidence, predictive modeling, and 6–7 years of advanced experience. The recruiter also joined the interview about 10 minutes late, which set an odd tone. The next interview was with the hiring manager. This was a positive, informal conversation, and I genuinely felt that the group and the mission aligned with my background. The interview that followed, with a more senior team member, also went well. They were familiar with my work, acknowledged my achievements, and said I could be a strong fit. Roughly five weeks later, I had two panel interviews on the same day. Both panels went smoothly overall. One senior interviewer asked about a topic that had no relation to the job description, which felt out of place, but the rest of the discussion was fine. The other panel was more technical, open-ended, and led by thoughtful and engaged team members. After another 1–2 weeks, I was invited to a final interview to deliver a presentation. This was straightforward, as I had plenty of relevant technical and professional experience to share, and I tied it closely to the job description. About a week later, HR told me a decision would be made by the end of the week. When I didn’t hear back, I sent a follow-up. I then received an automated message that the HR contact was on leave, so I forwarded the email to the substitute contact. A few days later, the substitute HR representative informed me that the team decided to move forward with another candidate because my experience was not directly aligned with what they needed. The overall process involved six interviews over a long timeline. While many of the conversations were positive and the teams were professional, the communication toward the end and the unclear alignment between HR’s understanding of the role and the actual job requirements made the experience discouraging. After investing significant time and preparation, the final outcome felt abrupt and not fully reflective of the earlier feedback.

I went through 3 rounds of interviews with Novartis, including an initial 30 mins conversation with the talent acquisition team. That part of the process was smooth and pleasant. The second and third rounds were technical interviews. Unfortunately, the second round raised some red flags. The interviewers didn’t seem to know who was supposed to be on the panel and even questioned each other’s presence during the call. This made me extremely uncomfortable and clearly highlighted a lack of internal coordination. Additionally, the panel was quite unfriendly, and their facial expressions of one of the interviewee gave the impression she wasn't open to a meaningful or engaging discussion. Some of the questions were standard, such as “Where did you fail and what did you do about it?” I answered using the STAR method and kept my responses focused, but the lack of rapport and cold tone from the interviewers made it a difficult experience. The final round with the hiring manager was the most disappointing. She joined 10 minutes late and opened by saying she only had 30 minutes to complete the interview. Her tone throughout was unfriendly, and she commented that while candidates may look good on paper, whether they’re a fit for “an esteemed company like Novartis ” is still a question. Her attitude came across as condescending and dismissive. Overall, the interview process left a negative impression. To top it all, the lack of response from HR team despite followups is appaulling! Even if I had received an offer, this experience made it clear that Novartis isn’t a company I would feel comfortable working for!