2x interviews with a total of four potential colleagues: hiring director, another director, and two experienced analysts. Mostly comprised of structured, competency based questions with some open-ended discussion of key themes and opinions.

Initial contact was a direct email to me from HR via Linkedin as they tried to recruit me. After exchanging emails we scheduled a phone interview. The phone interview came across a bit robotic. The interviewer mostly asked screening questions and confirmed data that was made clear from my CV (# of years of work experience, CFA charter, grad school, etc.). Then they asked me to explain some of my past work experience, outlined their job role requirements, checked whether it would be an opportunity I'd be interested in, and then asked specific questions related to my ability to perform the job functions. Multiple times throughout the interview they asked about my salary/compensation, and despite being repeatedly told it was confidential, they insisted they need to know, despite them being unwilling to provide any expected salary range. Towards they end they made it obvious that knowing my salary was ABSOLUTELY a prerequisite to any continuing discussion, and it caused the interview to break down and become uncomfortable. Eventually I told them my target salary range, to which the interviewer chuckled and responded that my expected salary was nearly double what the other candidates they were interviewing were being paid. The interview ended at that point as it was clear there was nothing further to discuss. Not surprisingly, 6 months later the job is still unfilled and they repost it weekly on the major job boards. It's clear that Morningstar cares less about finding the best candidate for the role, and more about paying the lowest price possible for someone who is just barely qualified to do the job. The irony that their business model is providing guidance to investors on which professionals are worth higher than market rate compensation isn't lost on me.