I recently interviewed with Lonza and wanted to share my detailed feedback on the experience. Positives: Efficient Scheduling: The interviews with the interview team were arranged quickly by the recruiter which was convenient. Casual Conversation: My initial conversation with the first interviewer was more relaxed and conversational. The questions were presented in a way that didn’t feel interrogative, making it a more comfortable interaction. Areas for Improvement: Punctuality: Both interviewers were late to our scheduled meetings. This was disappointing, as punctuality is essential in a professional setting. If a candidate is late, it can negatively impact their chances, and the same standard should apply to interviewers. Preparation: It was clear that the first interviewer hadn’t reviewed my resume before our meeting. This oversight made it challenging to discuss my qualifications and how they align with the role in a focused manner. Interview Style: The second interviewer’s approach was very intense and felt more like an interrogation than a constructive discussion. The interview began with detailed questions like, “What is the difference between fully insured and self-insured?” After I answered, the interviewer asked, “Did you just Google that?” I responded, “No, why?” The reply was, “Because your answer was exactly the definition on Google.” This made me feel uneasy. I explained that I am Autistic and that my responses are typically detailed and precise. Despite my disclosure, the interviewer continued with a series of rapid-fire questions such as “At what age can a child be removed from their parents’ insurance policy?” (I answered “26”), “Define VLOOKUP,” and “Define array.” (This was a follow up question to my definition of VLOOKUP) . Each answer led to further definitions, which seemed excessive. For example, after explaining VLOOKUP and mentioning “array,” I was asked to define “array,” to which I provided a brief explanation to move on. The interviewer proceeded with questions like “Define FMLA,” and “What does ADA stand for and define it?” After I detailed the ADA and the accommodation process, I was asked to give examples from my experience. Even as I shared my examples, I was interrupted, making the process feel more like a test of my knowledge and honesty than an evaluation of my experience and suitability for the role.. Throughout this part of the interview, I felt increasingly uncomfortable and almost discriminated against due to how my detailed responses—stemming from my communication style as someone on the Autism spectrum—were received. I inquired about the possibility of working on an upcoming acquisition in July, as mentioned during the recruiter screen. The interviewer’s response was dismissive, questioning where I had heard that and clarifying that the role would not involve this project and even stating “ I wish recruiting wouldn’t share that kind of stuff”. This indicated a disconnect within the team about the role’s actual responsibilities. Follow-Up: After the interview, I emailed the recruiter to provide feedback on my experience but did not receive a response. It would have been helpful to receive acknowledgment or a follow-up to discuss the concerns raised. Overall, the interview felt one-sided and didn’t allow for a meaningful conversation about my potential fit with the team. The second interviewer’s approach seemed more focused on testing my integrity and knowledge under pressure rather than understanding my qualifications and how I might contribute to the team. This was one of the most uncomfortable interview experiences I’ve had, and it left me feeling judged and discriminated against on my communication style than on my actual skills and experience. I hope Lonza takes this feedback into account and makes improvements to their interview process. Creating a more inclusive and respectful environment is crucial, especially for candidates with disabilities who may communicate differently but are fully capable of performing the job effectively.