This company seemed to make the process up as they went along. In the HR screening interview, they indicated a 3 step process: Step 1: HR Screening interview Step 2: Business interview with the CEO Step 3: Tech interview with the CTO After I successfully made it through the above, then suddenly they needed: Step 4: Another HR & (I think what was the) Marketing Manager (a peer) interview In all of the above steps, they indicated that they are specifically looking for a candidate with a strong technical background (I have been a dev on all levels, architect, DBA, devops engineer, team lead, etc and have a total of 18 years of experience in these kinds of tech positions). Now I can think of quite a few reasons why they would need a strong tech person in a managerial position, e.g.: I could help the devs gets over a technical hurdle; I could mentor the devs; I could guide the company on tech choices; I could better assist the devs with their career planning; I could jump in and code in a pinch in an emergency (not ideal but sometimes you gotta do what you gotta do to get the job done); etc. However, their reason for wanting a strong tech person was: so that when the devs give an estimate as to how long a task is going to take, I can see if they are BS'ing. Other than what I had already read on glassdoor, this was the first red flag I got directly from the company. Step 5: Subordinate interview. That's right: a couple of employees who would be reporting to me had to interview me to determine if I can do the job. 🙄 So anyway, I make it through the process with mostly flying colours. They've been in operation for 20+ years but still use Waterfall (no Agile), no devops, CI/CD, feature flags, automated testing nor even unit testing; they recently overran a project quote by 100% (hello, Waterfall?); and they have poor developer morale. These are all things I am very good at fixing, and I actually *enjoy* these kinds of challenges. At the end of Step 1, they wanted to know my salary expectations while insisting they don't have a salary range for the position (note: it's not a new position. Interestingly, the last SDM left because "she couldn't handle it", they said. Another red flag?). I gave them the range I am interviewing for at other companies (R100k - R125k pm) and they nodded along in agreement, saying that this was in line with what their other candidates have indicated. Fast-forward to after Step 5, and they offer me R80k pm (telephonically). I reject this offer and kindly ask them to refer back to Step 1 where range was discussed and accepted, and I proceeded with the entire interview process in good faith based on that range. Then they (telephonically) offer me a revised offer of R90k pm. I initially reject this, but then accept on condition that after 6 months we do a performance review, and if I my performance is on par, the salary automatically gets increased to R100k pm (a minimum for someone with my vast technical and solid management experience). And I want the offer in writing. Eventually they send me an offer letter for R90k with a performance review within the first 6 months, and should I be found to be EXCELLING in certain areas, the company may, AT ITS SOLE DISCRETION, adjust my salary. "Excelling" (not on par), "sole discretion" (not automatic), "adjust" (no mention of R100k pm). At the same time, they insist they want my latest payslips (this is highly unethical, as what I earned at another company is irrelevant to what I will be earning at this company). It just so happens I have been taking on bits of freelancing dev work, and my last managerial position was a remote position for an overseas company that never gave the foreign employees payslips. So they insisted that they instead wanted bank statements, where I could just redact all transactions except the freelance payments. The freelance payments for the dev work I did for January 2024 totalled to R16k. When they saw this, they could no longer "motivate" for the R90k salary offer, and needed some payslip or bank statement with a value much closer to it. They expressed that they don't want to overpay or underpay an employee. [Again, this is 1) unethical and 2) illogical, since: 1) what I earned elsewhere was irrelevant and 2) these freelance payments were literally for minor amounts of development work, not SDM work.] However, I was very glad that they said they don't want to underpay an employee, as it just so happens that April 2022 to March 2023 I was in a managerial position and earned R95k pm. Adjusting for inflation only, it means I should now be earning ±R105k pm. However, I indicate to them I am still willing to come in at the bottom of our initially agreed upon range: R100k pm. I also supply a bank statement with the R95k payment so they can "motivate" for R100k pm. They didn't accept my counteroffer. Evidently, they were never intending to honour the salary range agreed to in Step 1. My advice: stay away.