Two live mock interviews for Customer Decision Hub roles, one technical and one scenario, both recorded and each followed by a written scorecard against the criteria a real panel scores on.
Slots are arranged directly rather than sold from a page, because every session is scheduled around your interview date. Tell me about the role and I will come back with availability and the price.
Enquire about a slotReading about arbitration and being asked to defend it are two different activities. The second one has a person on the other side who says “but why does propensity matter if the margin is higher” halfway through your answer, and everything depends on what you do next.
That moment cannot be rehearsed alone. Neither can the scenario round, where the failure mode is almost always the same: a good design, delivered as forty minutes of unstructured thinking out loud, with the strongest point arriving after the panel has already stopped listening.
Most people have never heard themselves answer a technical question. The recording is usually the part that changes behaviour, more than either scorecard does.
It is also the part people most want to skip, which is exactly why it stays in.
It is paced so that the first scorecard has time to change something before the second round tests whether it did.
Send me the job description, the round you are worried about and where you think your own gap is. The mocks are built against that role rather than a generic CDH script, so a lead architect and a strategy designer never get the same session.
Sixty minutes on the taxonomy, engagement policies, arbitration, strategy components and adaptive models. It is run as an interview rather than a tutorial, so you are pushed on every answer and the follow-up questions keep coming.
A written assessment arrives within two business days, marked against the criteria a panel scores on: correctness, structure, clarity and the ability to defend a design. It is specific, and blunt where it needs to be.
A full next-best-action design case, thought through out loud. This is where most candidates lose the thread, and where a recording is worth more than any amount of feedback in the moment.
You receive a second scorecard, a clear view of how the two rounds compare, and a short, ordered list of what to fix in the time you have left before the real thing.
Sixty minutes each, run as genuine interviews rather than coaching sessions, with all of the pushback and follow-up questions left in.
The recordings are yours to keep. Hearing your own hedging is the single fastest correction available to you.
Two of them, marked against the criteria a panel scores on: correctness, structure, clarity and whether you can defend a design.
Every question is built from your actual job description, so the weighting matches the role you are going for.
The three things worth changing in the time you have, rather than a list of everything you did wrong.
You get a straight assessment, including, where it is true, that you are ready and should stop preparing.
The intensive is rehearsal, and rehearsal works best when the material is already in place. Spending a live round explaining what interaction history summaries are is a poor use of an hour you have paid for.
The guide gives you one complete CDH programme in writing, from the data model to the channels and the operation around them, with thirty-two questions answered, so the sessions can be spent on delivery instead.
If you have the time, yes. The intensive is rehearsal, and it is most valuable once the material is already in your head, because the sessions can then be spent on delivery rather than on filling gaps you could have closed by reading.
If your interview is this week, come straight here. Fixing the two or three things that are costing you is a better use of the days you have left.
Very. A mock interview that tells you it went well when it did not is worse than no mock interview at all, because you walk into the real one believing something untrue.
The scorecards are specific about what went wrong and what to do instead. Where an answer was strong, that is recorded too, because knowing which parts to leave alone matters just as much.
No, and anyone who claims otherwise is selling you something else. The sessions are built on the question shapes that recur across CDH hiring, weighted towards your own job description.
No company's process is reproduced, and nothing confidential to a client or an employer is ever used.
The two rounds are designed as a pair. The second scorecard is only meaningful as a comparison against the first, and the technical and scenario rounds fail in different ways.
If your situation only calls for one, say so when you enquire and I will tell you honestly whether it is worth booking at all.
Send me the role, the date if you have one, and where you think it is most likely to go wrong. I will come back with availability and an honest read on whether the intensive is the right thing for your situation.
Two rounds, two scorecards, and a recording that shows you exactly what you sound like.