This was the weirdest interview process I have ever been on. The first step was giving me and another candidate both a technical test with a scenario and how we would deal with it. After 20 minutes they had us defend our solutions against each other. Then we did the usual 1 on 1 interviews and then they gave me 3 topics (Abortion, Violence on TV, something else). They had me choose one, a side of the topic I wanted to defend and then gave me 10 minutes to prepare my argument. They then sent 2 people who take the other side of the argument and try and get you worked up. Lots of good cop, bad cop, etc. I believe the goal was to make sure you can talk in a meeting without getting excited about something, but I would rather be excitable and passionate on how I feel something should be then talk and accomplish nothing. I like to make decisions and like managers who make decisions