u/Select_Pirate1428

Hi everyone, need some thoughts lol.

I already went through 4 interviews with the team/hiring managers, and now my 5th and supposedly final interview was with HR. Since I made it this far, does that usually mean I’m already selected for the role and HR is more of a formality, or am I still being assessed against other candidates?

My thought process is: if I already moved through all the team interviews and made it to the final stage, doesn’t that usually mean the team already approved/selected me? Like HR wouldn’t really have a say anymore on whether I’ll move forward or not, right? Or can HR still decide not to push through with a candidate at this stage?

During the HR interview, he asked for my expected compensation/salary, mentioned that I’d be accomplishing some forms/files, and said he'd send them over. But until now, I haven’t received anything yet 😅

I know getting through multiple rounds is a good sign, but now I’m overthinking if I actually got chosen or if HR is still assessing things lol. Has anyone experienced something similar? What usually happens at this stage?

I have a question—has anyone experienced this before? Is it weird that the final interview is with someone from the Executive Office?

This is my first time encountering this kind of process. After the initial HR interview, I was told the next (final) interview would be with someone from the Executive Office—not the Head or direct hiring manager.

Honestly, I was expecting the usual flow where you meet the hiring manager first, maybe even the team lead or head of department, so you get a clearer idea of the role, day-to-day tasks, and team structure.

In this case, I haven’t even spoken to anyone from the team yet, which makes me a bit confused on how I’m supposed to understand the actual scope of the role or what my day-to-day would look like.

Is this a normal setup in some companies, or is it a sign that the role is more centralized under executive/admin and not really department-based? Would appreciate insights from anyone who’s gone through something similar.

Months ago, I interviewed for a role at Foodpanda and wanted to share my experience / get thoughts.

First interview was with HR (not PH-based) and it actually went really well — smooth conversation, professional, and overall good vibe.

Second was with the hiring manager, and honestly, he was great too. Super nice, easy to talk to, and the interview felt productive.

Then came the final interview with the department head… and this one threw me off a bit. The vibe was completely different. The questions didn’t feel very technical or even aligned with the role — parang medyo out of left field at times. What also bothered me was he answered a call during the interview and even stepped out of the meeting for a few minutes.

In the end, I still got an offer, which I appreciate, but I can’t lie — the final interview experience left me a bit hesitant. Has anyone experienced something similar where one interviewer kind of changed your perception of the role/company?

Curious how people approach this.
Have you ever reapplied to a company after getting rejected the first time around, especially if you already made it to the final interview stages? Like maybe 1–2 years later after gaining more experience, a stronger resume, better role fit, etc.
Do you usually:
just submit a new application normally
reach out directly to the hiring manager/recruiter you spoke with before
or avoid the company entirely because you assume they already passed on you once?
I’ve heard mixed opinions. Some people say recruiters barely remember candidates after a while, while others say final-round candidates are sometimes encouraged to reapply later on.
Would love to hear experiences from both applicants and recruiters/HR people.

Dami ko napapansin na Mass Comm / AB Comm grads nasa Brand Marketing roles na sa FMCG and telco.

Coming from Marketing / Management, medyo off lang kasi these roles are usually aligned talaga sa marketing/business grads, pero ngayon parang normal na na comms grads are in brand teams.

Yung iba galing agency or media/tv/production background, then eventually napupunta client side / brand side.

Feels like na-blur na yung boundary ng marketing/business path vs comms path, lalo na sa brand roles.

Parang ngayon, hindi na ganun ka-clear kung ano talaga yung “expected” background for brand marketing roles.

Dapat mga agency/tv/production roles nalang kayo wag niyo na agawan mga marketing graduates ng job.

For those working in telco or tech—curious how much this actually matters in hiring.
Say you’re applying to Smart but you’ve been a Globe user ever since, or applying to Samsung while using an iPhone. You understand the brand, you’re genuinely interested, but you’re not a current user.
If this comes up in interviews:
Does it affect how you’re evaluated?
Is saying “I’ll switch if I get accepted” a red flag or normal?
How do strong candidates usually frame this without sounding performative?
Would love to hear from hiring managers or anyone who’s been in this situation—especially for marketing/brand roles where product use might be more relevant.

I recently went through an interview process and learned that their compensation is structured strictly around experience brackets (e.g., 1–2 years, 3–5 years, 5+ years), with fixed salary ranges for each.

This honestly caught me off guard because it’s my first time encountering this after going through multiple interviews and offers over the past few years. In my experience, compensation was usually more flexible and took into account skills, performance, and overall fit for the role—not just the number of years.

I understand the need for internal structure, but it made me wonder how common this setup really is. It seems like it could limit candidates who may have fewer years of experience but can already perform at a higher level.

For those who’ve experienced something similar, is this standard practice in most companies, or does it really vary depending on the organization?

Curious to hear your thoughts.