Interview process was as follows
1) Pre-recorded video screen with timed responses
2) Two-hour skills test scheduled (limited flexibility on time)
3) Panel interview with potential colleagues
Overall a pleasant process, professional communication, though somewhat unclear about their expectations for their entry-level role
I applied online. I interviewed at Human Rights Watch (New York, NY) in Sep 2020
Interview
Interview process was extensive but did move quickly. It included two interviews (one with a smaller panel and one with a larger panel) and two timed written exams in the span of roughly two weeks.
Interview questions [2]
Question 1
What is a criticism you have received from a supervisor and how are you working on it?
I applied online. The process took 5 weeks. I interviewed at Human Rights Watch
Interview
Overall: disappointing interaction with condescending HRW interviewer
First interview was with two people. It was very pleasant and I enjoyed our conversation.
The next step was a skills test, which was around 2-3 hours. It wasn't difficult and just tested my ability to work under pressure.
I then moved onto a second round interview with a larger panel of people. My first impression was that it was very corporate-like, but it was almost expected given the size of the organization. It was going fine until the executive director of one of the teams gave me a scenario question, then kept giving me obstacles when I responded, and finally insulted my intelligence in a condescending tone. It had nothing to do with the original question or my ability to perform my duties in the scenario. Perhaps he felt threatened when I pointed out a gap in his scenario that would make it irrelevant? (This is me trying to justify his actions) Regardless, I was honestly taken aback by the level of disdain and disrespect, even as he tried to play it casually in a way that shot my confidence for the rest of the interview. The whole team then proceeded to say they have the nicest and friendliest team, as apparently not every department is great to work with (a red flag). Honestly, I never expected someone working for a human rights organization to be condescending in a situation where you're supposed to make your organization an attractive, not repelling, place.
Prior to my interview, I had read "red flag" reviews about HRW under-appreciating Associates and treating them as lesser-than, but I gave them the benefit of the doubt. But ultimately, the interaction I had with the interviewers confirmed for me that I didn't want to work for HRW. If someone fighting for the human rights and dignity of all people treats a potential employee poorly during an interview, it can't get any better working under them full-time. At a human rights organization, it should be expected that staff uphold the basic tenets of human rights and respect others in the workplace. In these kinds of positions, it's necessary to practice what you preach.
More importantly, though, I learned an important lesson (albeit at the expense of my mental health): do not compromise your values or self-respect over a job!
Interview questions [1]
Question 1
Why do are you a good fit for the job?
What do you understand the position duties to be?
Was there a moment you received constructive criticism, and how did you handle that?